# Chanting and sight setup



## Sasquech

Let me begin with this is a geometry problem. 

Base assumption: For the purposes of this discussion we are talking about a target slider type sight. There are other sight types can have pins adjusted to make each pin in and out to put them on the same plane with the other components and allow for chanting. 

1) there is a plane defined by the peep and the arrow shaft 
A point and a line define the plane

Point being the peep line the arrow. 

2) Now the sight aiming point must be in the same plane for the target to hit the point being defined by the peep and sight intersection to the target. 

3) if the bow is canted and the sight bar is setup vertical this means that there can only be one point where the plane of arrow peep can intersect with the sight. 
4) If the sight point (pin or dot or ring ) does not travel in the plane at all times during its up and down adjustment for distance you will get right and lefts either side from the intersection point. 

The bow string and sight vertical travel must be parallel and the aiming point always in the plane . Therefore; the bow must not be canted to prevent deviations at different distances.

Will one of you kind fellows please point out how this is incorrect.


----------



## 3-D For Life

If you set up your bow with string and the vertical sight bar level some people fight to keep the bubble in the center (level). But if you see that when you at full draw that your bubble is always out to the right 1/2 bubble you just set you bow in a bow vise then adjust it so the level shows what you have all the time while at full draw (1/2 bubble to the right). Next loosen up the first axis adjustment and reset it so the bubble is now level and it will now be level for you at full draw. It doesnt matter if you cant the bow when shooting as long as you always cant it the same way every time. Allot of people just add weight to the side bar to correct the bubble being off but this induces torque into your shooting form.


----------



## Sasquech

Ok same question how can the sight not have right and lefts at longer and shorter distances since the sight travel is not coplaner with the arrow and peep


----------



## grousegrove

Squatch, If I understand your statement (para 4) no you're not incorrect. 
I think IF the plane created by the up/down travel of a bow's sight adjustments makes the plane between it and the peep different, at various points, than the one between the arrow and the peep, you would have left or rights at various distances. 
But I think what 3-D was trying to address is the practical fix, namely 1, 2, & 3rd axes adjustments. The way a good quality sight is mounted on one's bow can accommodate, within limits, an archer's natural cant (ie up and down not perfectly parallel to the riser's centerline between the top and bottom cam). You put the sight planes back in alignment with the plane of the arrow's fall, which makes it possible to eliminate left and rights even with a slight cant. Assuming a perfect tune for arrow flight and a perfect shot, the string pushes the arrow straight whether bow (and its string) is canted left or right, or not, and once it leaves the rest, gravity will pull it straight down. So the sight-plane is the variable. Consider that a crossbow string is it 90° to the sight's position and it still can work because (if) the sighting plane is on the same plane as the arrow's drop. 

Sorry if I misunderstood you.


----------



## ron w

the "point" being the "line of sight" through the peep" is the axis, of the arrow's vertical plane of trajectory. this plane of trajectory, is a constant. as you cant the bow it deviates from vertical, around the line of sight. the vertical plane of the arrows trajectory, also deviates from vertical in relation to the line of sight with the line of sight being the axis of this deviation from vertical. so as you cant , the vertical line of the arrows trajectory cants the same amount you cant the bow. 
just as if your arrows are falling short (or long) of the line of sight when shot vertically, they also fall short (or long) of the line of sight when you cant the bow. the difference is that if they fall short (or long) of the line of sight when shot vertically, they will now also fall lef or right of the line of sight, because they also possess an deviation in left or right because the vertical plane of trajectory os now tilted in relation to the axis, which is the line of sight that never changes it's location. ...everything pivots around the line of sight. 
now, this axis, being the line of sight, is a straight line between the bow's sighting apparatus and the "center of the target" , so if the bow is set, ie (the sights are adjusted to hit with the line of sight at a specific range) and the arrows vertical plane of trajectory crosses that axis at two points in it's arc of trajectory, vertical alignment remains constant whether the arrow falls short or gors long of the line of sight's intersection with the target. when you add a cant to the arrows vertical alignment with the axis (the line of sight), you add a certain amount of horizontal deviation because the arrows trajectory is a curved line where only two points of that curved line intersect the axis (the line of sight) during it's flight to the target. 
now despite the cant, if the trajectory of the arrow is adjusted (by elevation), so that the trajectory and the "axis" or (line of sight) terminate at the same point (the center of the target) your sight setting is said to be "right on" this alignment will never change for any one given distance, as the line of sight can only be at the correct elevation at one point in the arrows trajectory, which doesn't change from shot to shot.so if the sight setting is slightly long or short of the distance shot, you have a condition that produces a high or low POI and a Left or right POI. if all is correct (arrows plane of trajectory crosses the line of sight, for the second time, at the center of the target) for any given distance shot, both elevation of POI and horizontal deviation of POI will remain the same whether canted or kept vertical because the plane of the arrow's trajectory pivots around the line of sight (the axis), there is no change in distance or change in alignment of the terminating point of the line of sight and the plane of the arrows trajectory. the arrow's plane of trajectory, simply strikes it's arc at an angle in relation to the axis and vertical, that coincides with the amount of cant you introduce.
left and /or right deviation occurs when the terminating point of the axis and the terminating point of the arrows trajectory are not the same.


----------



## ron w

another way to explain it in a more illustrative mannor,......

on a pice of paper, draw a dead straight line. now take a plate or something and draw a curve, where the curve intersects the straight line twice and continue the curved line past the two intersections at both ends. what you have done, is drawn the relationship, between line of sight and the arrow's trajectory.
now, make a point on the line of sight, that represents the target and make that point beyond on of the points of intersection between the line of sight and the arrow's trajectory. this would illustrate a shot that was made using a sight elevation that was short for the distance shot.....the arrow's trajectory, strikes the target low. now imagine canting your bow. the line of sight (the straight line) doesn't change in any direction, and is the axis of the arrows trajectory. because the arrow struck low, it will also strike left or right of the line of sight, because it crosses the line of sight at an angle relative to the amount of cant you introduce.


----------



## ILOVE3D

Just thinking here, we set up our bow by perhaps walk back tuning or whatever with the bow vertical or even a slight chant to hit the same vertical line from point blank to out to perhaps 50, 60, 80 or whatever you decide. The difference between all those distances will only be a small degree due to the sight only being a few inches above the line of sight and unless using a hooter shooter, one could hardly ever tell say at 60 yards the arrow is off say 1/2" from what it was at 3 yards. Now induce chanting at a different degree from when the bow was sighted in with 2nd and 3rd axis and the poi does change due to the geometry. This is why we tip the bow top into the wind to offset the effects of the wind from that of when there is no wind. What do you guys think?


----------



## SonnyThomas

Can't a picture I wanted to post. One of my bows was off a bit so I put shims behind the sight mounting plate at the bottom. Just kept adding until the bubble was level with me at full draw. Never had to move anything else.


----------



## ron w

ILOVE3D said:


> Just thinking here, we set up our bow by perhaps walk back tuning or whatever with the bow vertical or even a slight chant to hit the same vertical line from point blank to out to perhaps 50, 60, 80 or whatever you decide. The difference between all those distances will only be a small degree due to the sight only being a few inches above the line of sight and unless using a hooter shooter, one could hardly ever tell say at 60 yards the arrow is off say 1/2" from what it was at 3 yards. Now induce chanting at a different degree from when the bow was sighted in with 2nd and 3rd axis and the poi does change due to the geometry. This is why we tip the bow top into the wind to offset the effects of the wind from that of when there is no wind. What do you guys think?


 when we cant into the wind, we are demonstrating the fact that if the sights yardage is correct, the cant offers the same POI as a vertical hold. by canting, we a re using the bow's energy to drive the arrow into the wind, presenting the smaller "frontal plane" of the arrow, to which the wing pushes against, producing less deviation from the intended POI. there is "windage" involved unless the wing is very light, the effectual "windage hold" when canting, is much reduced to the point that a hold at maybe the edge of the bulls eye, is all that's necessary. the idea is that we can visualize how much windage we are holding, by knowing that the bulls eye is "X" inches in diameter and it gives us a specific point at which to aim, which is always better than just aiming at a point in space, so to speak. 
when the wind is only mild, the bow's energy will drive the smaller lateral plane of the arrow into the wind, using the time that the arrow has the most energy (directly after leaving the bow) to work against the wind's attempt to displace the flight and POI and because the axis doesn't change in relation to the target and the arrow's trajectory pivots around the axis (line of sight), the arrow arrives at the same point, as when a normal vertical hold is used. when we use a regular vertical hold and offset for windage, the side profile of the arrow is the same size all the time throughout it's flight and present an increased advantage chronologically (time in flight) for the wind to displace it, as it slows down further along it's trajectory.
think about when you throw a football a long distance, in a wind, you have to throw somewhat into the wind to get the ball where you want it. you doing exactly the same thing when you cant the bow....you throwing the arrow into the wind instead of directly across the wind's path. the same physics apply,....the foot ball has the most energy to fight the wind when it leaves you hand, and throwing it into the wing presents the smallest side profile for the wind to push against. at the same time your line of sight doesn't change because it's windy, you simply cant the plane of the football's trajectory, in relation to your line of sight, into the crossing wind to have the foot ball arrive where you want it to.


----------



## ILOVE3D

Not trying to argue with anybody but say there is NO wind, my bow was set up bubble centered and riser vertical under normal conditions. Now, during the same period of NO wind, I cant my bow and the arrow does have a poi off to whatever side I cant it to. The amount the arrow hits off center of the vertical line is dependent on how much I cant my bow and how far the target is. I can't explain it technically and not going to loose any sleep over it, I just know it works. I do know by trial though roughly how much to bubble be it a half bubble or a full bubble depending on the wind velocity and distance and of course the arrow setup. That being said, if you just think about canting your bow say 45 degrees to the right. When the sight or pin is actually on target but the arrow is actually pointing off to the left of your line of sight although a very small amount. This logic tell me the arrow should hit to the left and also lower than normal because as you cant the bow, the horizontal distance from the sight to the arrow diminishes also which would throw your poi and the arrow would supposedly hit lower than normal without a cant. Too much thinking for this early in the day for an old retired guy.


----------



## Padgett

I talked about this in a pm this morning but what allowed me to get a grasp on this a few years ago was when I let go of the magical force that my brain was forcing a bow to give to the arrow on the way to the target. The arrow doesn't care if you are canting it or not, the second it leaves the bow it is going to travel on a curve based on its speed and weight and it could care less if it is canted or not. 

The key here is every time you pull the bow back if you want to hit dead on left and right you must not:

1. be torquing the bow differently, it must be gripped and torqued the same each and every shot.

2. be canting the bow differently, it must be held at the same cant that you sighted the bow in with.

With a smooth release and follow through if you do these two things you are going to allow the arrow to leave the bow the same each and every time and help your chances of hitting dead on left and right.


----------



## Padgett

The problem is that so many people don't spend or take the time to get the second axis absolutely perfect, to do this you need to get the second axis set and then move the sight up and down and make sure that as you move the sight up and down to the extreme top and bottom that the bubble stays perfectly centered. I personally do this with the sight off the bow in a actual bench vice in my garage, I don't like doing this on the bow in a bow vice. they are flimsy and have a lot of play in them that wiggles as you turn the knob. Second axis is the only setting that can be done with the sight off the bow, and to me off the bow is the best choice. First and third axis must be done with the sight on the bow, funny thing is that first axis is a personal choice and any setting of the first axis is acceptable where 3rd axis must be done on the bow at full draw and not on some stupid aftermarket jig being offered by some companies. Third axis is what takes care of the riser torque that you are introducing to the bow when at full draw.


----------



## Padgett

The second problem people have with lefts and rights is that they have a bubble to show them that their bow isn't canted correctly but they don't have a torque indicator to tell them that they are twisting the riser with their grip differently from shot to shot. Both of the issues make big differences in you being able to hit dead on and need to be perfected as best you can.


----------



## ILOVE3D

Padgett said:


> I talked about this in a pm this morning but what allowed me to get a grasp on this a few years ago was when I let go of the magical force that my brain was forcing a bow to give to the arrow on the way to the target. The arrow doesn't care if you are canting it or not, the second it leaves the bow it is going to travel on a curve based on its speed and weight and it could care less if it is canted or not.
> 
> The key here is every time you pull the bow back if you want to hit dead on left and right you must not:
> 
> 
> 
> 1. be torquing the bow differently, it must be gripped and torqued the same each and every shot.
> 
> 2. be canting the bow differently, it must be held at the same cant that you sighted the bow in with.
> 
> With a smooth release and follow through if you do these two things you are going to allow the arrow to leave the bow the same each and every time and help your chances of hitting dead on left and right.


So Padgett, when shooting during windy conditions, so you just aim off center? Sometimes at various venues, the wind sometimes comes from one side and maybe 2 minutes later before I've finished my 6 arrows, it dies down or even changes direction. I've tried aiming off center and frequently when the shot goes off and my pin somehow (subconsciously I'm sure) found it's way back to the center of the gold and if it was windy, my arrow was blown off to the side and how much depended on how windy and how far the target was. For me what has seemed to work best was shooting in the wind and canting but I'm far from a professional at this. It would be interesting to hear what the professionals do say at Copenhagen, Anatalya or any of the big time shoots where the big boys compete for worlds best.


----------



## Garceau

As long as the sight head is set 90 degrees to the horizon at full draw and you then cant the bow the same each time, your arrows will still hit center - 

Gillingham talks about this in his video segments regarding the hamskea level - he has a cant in his bow, always has so he says.


----------



## ron w

absolutely wrong Padgett.,......
no disrespect meant.......vertical plane through an arrow's trajectory does indeed follow the same canted angle that the bow is canted to. the only deviation is that as it is on it's downward half of it's flight, gravity tries to pull it out off it's canted plane and . however the reason we spin the arrow as it flies to to preserve the path of flight the arrows starts out on. if this weren't true, ad you canted the bow, consider that the height of trajectory would show as a distance left or right of the line of sight, depending on whether you cant left or cant right because at the arrows maximum height of trajectory the arrows path is considerably left or right of the line of sight, when shooting canted. if gravity simply pulled the arrow completely vertically down, from the point of it's maximum height of trajectory, geometry tells us that the arrow would be displaced left or right the same distance as the arrows maximum height of trajectory.
now, when weather is not windy, and your sight is set to the (exact) distance you are shooting,.....when you cant the bow,..... and you shot is good,..... the arrow still hits the center of the target, or of course,... very close, given that gravity only pulls in the vertical plane it works against the arrows stability to remain on it's given course, and therefore because of the trajectory having a curve, the arrows does get pulled off some, but very little because gravity works in the realm of "time in flight" and not distance and the arrow's gyroscopic affect from spinning keeps the arrow on the plane that it started out on, which is aligned to the bows plane of thrust, which is canted....... you can't fight the laws of physics. 
if you were shoot 60 or 70 yards, the arrow's height of trajectory might be a couple feet or more, if what you say is true, the arrow would land a couple feet to the right or left of the target depending in which way you canted the bow because the plane of thrust is canted and the arrow's maximum height of trajectory will be mis-aligned with the line of sight by the square root of the height of height of tajectory's hypotenuse of the triangle formed by the trajectory's height from the line of sight, and it's distance left or right at that height, from the line of sight due to the cant.....but it doesn't, does it. .......if you shoot canted in no wind, the arrow still POI's with the line of sight, or very close, given the slight deviation from gravity's affect.


----------



## Rick!

ron w said:


> absolutely wrong Padgett.,......
> you can't fight the laws of physics. *or invent your own, only obama can do that*
> if you were shoot 60 or 70 yards, the arrow's height of trajectory might be a couple feet or more, if what you say is true, the arrow would land a couple feet to the right or left of the target depending in which way you canted the bow because the plane of thrust is canted and the arrow's maximum height of trajectory will be mis-aligned with the line of sight by the square root of the height of height of tajectory's hypotenuse of the triangle formed by the trajectory's height from the line of sight, and it's distance left or right at that height, from the line of sight due to the cant.....but it doesn't, does it. .......if you shoot canted in no wind, the arrow still POI's with the line of sight, or very close, given the slight deviation from gravity's affect.


Just a few numbers in a simple form so you guys can wrap your head around "canting":
Arrow leaves the bow at 284fps at a target 50 yards away.
The peep is 4 1/8" above the arrow.
The arrow reaches a height of 16.75 inches above its start height at the apex of its trajectory. 
You cant your bow a bit:

cant degreeslateral error (inches)20.5851.46102.90

It's not a pythagorean theorem problem where a^2 + b^2 = c^2, but it is still trig. You are projecting a parabola that is canted from vertical, downward onto the horizontal plane. The lateral error is directly related to the height the arrow reaches and the lean angle. Since the height is defined by arrow speed at release and bow/arrow combination with the sight dialed to a distance, the distance from the target is already "built in." 

Making the vertical sight thingy vertical to the horizon makes for really accurate vertical POI for the bow cant. The lateral error does not get adjusted out, you are just dead on at your favorite yardage.

If you practice a lot and are really,really good, you probably halve the lateral error by being dead on at your middle range. So a 2 degree cant is +- 0.290" on the example rig, which is my Dmax shooting GT22s. Myself, I'm not good enough to know I'm 9/32 inch off at 50 yards.

On my hunting bow with a 1" long level, a one bubble cant is 2.5 degrees if I did my measurements right. At 295fps, that's +- 0.340" at 50 yards. If you're a 1/4 bubble off or cant your bow a degree, the error really isn't big enough to sort out POI issues from form and release errors, in my opinion.

Personally, I adjust 2nd axis on my PSE bow vise and fix my grip and stab weighting to have a perfect bubble during draw and at full draw. 

Makes ya think how awesome an Oly recurve shooter is with a huge apex on arrow trajectory and no bubbles.

I welcome any corrections or real life measurements from a calm day just canting your bow.


----------



## TNMAN

Can you do the same math for a cross bow? Isn't it canted 90 degrees to the right? 

Arrows drop straight down no matter the cant. As long as the site is leveled on all 3 axis BEFORE kicking the site bar over to accommodate a natural cant, the bow will shoot down the middle at all distances. Where is the pic of Oldpro's sight when you need it?


----------



## ILOVE3D

So are you saying is it really makes no difference or not enough to mess with if you hold your bow straight up, cant to the left or right once you have set your sight to say straight vertical. You might have the correct formula but you couldn't convince me it doesn't make a difference. I went out this afternoon and shot my fita arrows at 40, 50 and 60 yards at the range. At first I was shooting at 40 and the wind hadn't kicked up at that time and I forgot to just try canting with no wind and see what happens. The wind was changing directions, first blowing from right to left then sometimes letting off then changing for a few minutes back left to right. I don't think it was blowing my bow and sight off that much but if I didn't cant my bow at 50 and 60 yards I would sometimes have arrows grouping around 4 or 5 inches off to the side from the wind. Yes, I had a couple fliers but usually at least 4 and sometimes 5 out of 6 arrows were in about a 4" group or close to it. If I would cant it (sorry but don't know what the degrees were but guessing more than 5) would group back in the center of the 122cm target face. Oh yes, shooting a Dom Max at 55 lbs, 28.5 dl and 450 vaps, 100 grain nibbs shooting around 287 if I remember correctly.


----------



## TNMAN

ILOVE3D said:


> *So are you saying is it really makes no difference or not enough to mess with if you hold your bow straight up, cant to the left or right once you have set your sight to say straight vertical. * You might have the correct formula but you couldn't convince me it doesn't make a difference. I went out this afternoon and shot my fita arrows at 40, 50 and 60 yards at the range. At first I was shooting at 40 and the wind hadn't kicked up at that time and I forgot to just try canting with no wind and see what happens. The wind was changing directions, first blowing from right to left then sometimes letting off then changing for a few minutes back left to right. I don't think it was blowing my bow and sight off that much but if I didn't cant my bow at 50 and 60 yards I would sometimes have arrows grouping around 4 or 5 inches off to the side from the wind. Yes, I had a couple fliers but usually at least 4 and sometimes 5 out of 6 arrows were in about a 4" group or close to it. If I would cant it (sorry but don't know what the degrees were but guessing more than 5) would group back in the center of the 122cm target face. Oh yes, shooting a Dom Max at 55 lbs, 28.5 dl and 450 vaps, 100 grain nibbs shooting around 287 if I remember correctly.


Didn't say anything like that. The OP is asking about shooting to a natural cant. To do that successfully, the shooter would have to cant the same amount on every shot. I happen to choose zero cant. Tim Gillingham cants a little to the right. That's what the bubble is for---keeping the same amount of cant and ensuring the sight bar is vertical at the shot.

As far as shooting in the wind, that's another subject. Some guys give it some bubble and some hold off. I can miss either way.


----------



## Sasquech

Actually to clarify 2 things crossbow is not same thing since 1 no level and arrow flight is up and down now can't your cross bow 10 degrees and tell me if the point of impact are the same. 


Secondly and most importantly the peep is not over the nock. Since the peep is off to the side the sight has to compensate for this it is a form of parallax it varies as the sight moves up and down as the sight will move towards and away from the arrow. Resulting in shifts from right to left. 


Think of it this way if I set up my rig with the bow canted bubble leveled and slider perpendicular to the ground. The pin right over the arrow. Ignoring the peep for now just liooking at a plum bob over the arrow and setting up the sight now introduced the peep which is now outside the plane of the pin and arrow. Remember geometry line plus a point makes a plane. Now add a peep if it is not coplaner with the sight and arrow changing the elevation will result in changes in the right and left poi. I need to draw you folks some pictures to get us all on the same page. I'll be back in the immortal words of king Arnold.


----------



## Lazarus

ILOVE3D said:


> It would be interesting to hear what the professionals do say at Copenhagen, Anatalya or any of the big time shoots where the big boys compete for worlds best.


Or then again, you could ask a 19 year old kid (shooting against several of those big boys) that won the USA Nationals at Decatur this summer (50 meters is 50 meters, and 30mph gusts are the same no matter what country you're in,) putting on an absolute clinic in the nastiest conditions known to man. Shooting 22's I might ad. 

With all due respect, I believe you all are overthinking this.


----------



## ron w

many times, trying to illustrate something that is cerebral with text, can be misinterpreted as "over thinking" an issue. what we can do with a short, quick thought, as we shoot,.....sometimes takes hundreds or thousands of words to describe on paper.


----------



## Padgett

There was another thread lately where we discussed either aiming off to the side in windy conditions or canting the bow into the wind and aiming dead on, that is to me a whole different issue that the original question in this thread.

I can honestly say that my bow shoots bullet holes as a bare shaft from basically all distances and I do believe that not hiding a weird nock high or nock low issue does help to some extent because the arrow is leaving the bow perfectly straight and there is no wobble for the fletching to fix. The arrow can simply allow the gravity to go ahead and do its thing and the arrow is free and clear of the bow and any and all influences that it may have had.

Once you get it in your head that there is no magical force that is attached to the arrow from the bow shooting with a natural cant really is something that your mind can accept. I know that since I started shooting with a full set of stabilizers that I haven't messed with my first axis one time, my bow sits nice and solid and I have really no idea if it is perfectly vertical or not and I don't care because my second axis is set perfectly and if my bubble is perfect then I know that my bow is going to hit dead on left and right.


----------



## Padgett

By the way I am enjoying this discussion, this is something that I used to be on the other side of the discussion and it took guys like Tim Gillingham to convince me to be on the side that i am now. I don't like wasting time doing stupid stuff that simply doesn't make a difference in my shooting and I want the most accurate and forgiving setup that I can come up with that actually works. 

I can honestly say that 4 to 5 years ago that I dreaded setting up a sight and my bow to work together because it took me a few hours to use multiple carpenters levels and tricks to get on top of things but now that I understand what is needed from my bow to be really solid it is very simple and straight forward.


----------



## fanio

The curve of the arrow is not affected by the angle of the bow at launch. If there is no wind, the arrow goes EXACTLY straight up, reaches an apex, and comes EXACTLY straight down. This is true whether your bow is 90deg (perfectly vertical) or at 60deg or 45deg or 10 deg (almost held horizontally). This is due to Newton's First Law of Motion: ("Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.") - if the only force is gravity - which works perfectly straight down - then the arrow cannot "curve" to the left/right (unless you are applying an external force with your fletches - and the fletching will have the same effect for a perfectly vertical bow).

The reason you shoot left/right when you cant the bow, is because you are changing the position of the dot. A cant to the left (top limb) will always move the dot to the left, so it is like you moved your sight's windage to "chase the arrow". It's that simple.


----------



## ron w

wrong......better go read a bit about ballistics and the gyroscopic affect, a spinning projectile has on the vertical plane of trajectory.


----------



## bowfisher

ron w said:


> wrong......better go read a bit about ballistics and the gyroscopic affect, a spinning projectile has on the vertical plane of trajectory.


Arrows not bullets Ron.


----------



## Padgett

My big thing is that back when I used a hunting bow in competition I had no rear bar and I always set up my sight so that it was perfect with the riser and then I had to fight with it to get the bubble centered. Back then I believed that the bow must be vertical to be accurate along with the sight pins. It felt like I was twisting the riser to get it to hold correctly.

Then I got into 3d and began shooting with a target bow and got a full set of stabs and with the rear bar learned quickly that it was just a few minutes of effort moving the bar a little and I could have the bow perfectly balanced and basically vertical every time I drew the bow back and it did so without fighting the bubble. 

Right now when I set up a bow to be dead on accurate I spend a few minutes with my buddies hamskea and make sure that the second and third axis are perfect, I don't even mess with the first axis because my bow basically sits vertical without me forcing it because of the stabs so in all reality it may be vertical or slightly off a little in one direction but it isn't something that I check because I don't care if it is vertical or not. All I know is that I aim directly at the 12 ring when I am shooting a asa tournament and I simply don't have issues with getting 8's missing on the left or right at any distance that I normally shoot. I do go out and shoot for fun at 70 and 90 yards from time to time and I am good to go back there also so these are the reasons why I think the way I do when it comes to shooting with a natural cant.


----------



## ILOVE3D

fanio said:


> The curve of the arrow is not affected by the angle of the bow at launch. If there is no wind, the arrow goes EXACTLY straight up, reaches an apex, and comes EXACTLY straight down. This is true whether your bow is 90deg (perfectly vertical) or at 60deg or 45deg or 10 deg (almost held horizontally). This is due to Newton's First Law of Motion: ("Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.") - if the only force is gravity - which works perfectly straight down - then the arrow cannot "curve" to the left/right *(unless you are applying an external force with your fletches -* and the fletching will have the same effect for a perfectly vertical bow).
> 
> 
> 
> The reason you shoot left/right when you cant the bow, is because you are changing the position of the dot. A cant to the left (top limb) will always move the dot to the left, so it is like you moved your sight's windage to "chase the arrow". It's that simple.


So, you are saying as I believe, the fletching can and will have an external force on the arrow and it would be different whether it was left helical or right and this would be exaggerated if there was either a left wind/breeze or a right wind/breeze. I believe this to be correct 100% although at most distances say up to 40 yards or so most archers are just not accurate enough to know the difference. It might even take a hooter shooter say out to 100 yards for some to notice the difference. I do know that as Ron stated bullets will either climb left, climb right, drop left or drop right depending on the spin and a cross breeze. Oh yes, the rotation of the earth will also have an effect on the same projectile however in archery or firearms, the effect will be in direct proportion to the distance of the shot. In Archery of course, the distance being so small even 100 yards or less will be minute although it is there.


----------



## ron w

bowfisher,....you know not of what you speak.....
"ballistics", doesn't only apply bullets. look up the definition of the term. regardless of speed, theories, physics and applications of "ballistics" is only, most commonly applied to bullets,... but within the realm of "sub-sonic" ballistics, the same theories and rules apply to any projectile that does not attain, super-sonic (faster than sound) velocity. arrows, are sub-sonic projectiles....are they not ?. if you look into it, deep enough, you just might find the term "front of center", in the both super sonic and sub sonic ballistic theory, because that is exactly where it comes from. 
here's one for you, try to find out why a foot ball, is shaped the way it is and why we throw them with a spiral........... foot balls aren't bullets either, are they ?. funny thing though,....what do they call a football that is thrown real hard ?.
another term you might find, is "dynamic couple" a term I've used here and which is the functional dynamics of FOC in relation to both super-sonic and sub-sonic projectiles. along with the term "trajectory", and "vertical plane of trajectory". bullets are just one type of projectile, there are many, including arrows and anything you throw, which certainly is not a "bullet", yet all those theories and rules still apply to them, just well as to a bullet. anything that flies through the air that is lofted into a parabolic trajectory to get from one spot to another, is considered subject to "ballistics"..... not just bullets.....imagine that !.


----------



## ron w

fanio,....
when you cant the bow, the dot does not move, it stays aligned with your line of sight, the same as when the bow is held vertically. it is the projected trajectory of the arrow, produced by the bow, that is changed. your line of sight is dead straight and is the axis around which the trajectory of the arrow, produced by the bow, rotates.


----------



## Sasquech

Ok folks back on topic 
Here is what I would to help me understand. I have tried to draw a pic and am still working on that. Here in the simplest terms. 

When the bow is canted the peep is no longer in the ballistic plane of arrow travel. It is off to the side so given the peep is not over the arrow to be on at 6 ft the sight can't be over the arrow they will form lines that intersect at the sight. Now change the yardage and the impact of the alignment difference changes. At 80 yards those lines don't intersect on the dot any longer it is now going to point to the side opposite of the can't. This only not true if the sight slider bar stays parallel to the bow and the scope is leveled on the end of the mechanism. Meaning the sight bar will travel right and left as it is adjusted up and down to compensate for the offset of the peep created by the can't. 

I hope I have made the issue more clear. If not I will try to get the diagrams drawn.


----------



## ron w

consider that, as the bow is canted, the line of sight is still dead straight and pointed at the center of the target, but, because the bow is canted, the arrow's trajectory, is now pointed up at the line of sight from below and to the side of the line of sight. thus the arrow's vertical plane of trajectory will intersect the line of sight askew of being vertically parallel to the line of sight. because the arrow's trajectory is parabolic, it's displacement is not evenly distributed between the bow and it maximum height and it's maximum height and the target,. this trajectory is however , the same whether askew or totally vertical , so if the sight is regulated correctly for a given distance, the arrow will still arrive at the same POI as when the bow is not canted. the vertical profile of the arrows vertical plane of trajectory is in the same plane as the vertical plane of thrust from the bow. 
as gravity pulls only in the vertical plane and works in the function of time in flight, the arrows velocity controls how much deviation from the vertical plane of trajectory is converted to change of POI. as the arrow is not in the air for a very long time, this deviation is negligible and dependent on the arrows weight, which regulates it's velocity, or time in flight at any given distance.
that,.....in simple terms, is what "ballistics" is all about, it doesn't matter if the projectile, is a bullet, or a rock, or a house, for that matter, gravity and physics applies it's forces in the same manner. 
consider the term "ballistic missile".... that is not a bullet either,..... but it's accuracy and POI is subject to the same rules and physics as anything else that is lofted through the air in a ballistic , or parabolic trajectory.
a ballistic missile and a bullet, are much more like an arrow, that you might think. they launch under power, and somewhere along it's trajectory, thrust is turned off as the rocket uses up it's fuel, or the bullet leaves the barrel and they then become a arrow for all practical applications,.... continuing on the trajectory that was established at time of launch and length of time of thrust. when the rocket burns out, or the bullet leaves the barrel, they are both in a continuous state of negative acceleration, from that point on. exactly the same as how an arrow, after leaving the bow, is in a continuous state of negative acceleration and its launch attitude and thrust time, is what establishes it's POI.


----------



## Rick!

I call bs on this "dynamic couple". Please provide academic proof and/or industry literature along with the appropriate illustration(s). 

Unless you mean these two:








Being that at least one poster here is a ballistics and firearms expert, and at least a few others are currently or former competitive shooters; what happens when you cant (chant?) your rifle 5 degrees on a bench rest and try to hit the bullseye at 500 or 1000 yards?

I would rather debate Laz than agree with him but he was right in post #22.


----------



## Sasquech

I guess the concept of the peep being out of the ballistic plane and the sight needing to move right and left as distance changes is too difficult a concept to put into words.


----------



## ron w

Rick! said:


> I call bs on this "dynamic couple". Please provide academic proof and/or industry literature along with the appropriate illustration(s).
> 
> Unless you mean these two:
> View attachment 2729098
> 
> 
> Being that at least one poster here is a ballistics and firearms expert, and at least a few others are currently or former competitive shooters; what happens when you cant (chant?) your rifle 5 degrees on a bench rest and try to hit the bullseye at 500 or 1000 yards?
> 
> I would rather debate Laz than agree with him but he was right in post #22.


 I don't see any those ballistics and firearms experts coming to thread to offer rebuttal to anything I said,....do you ?.
the exact same principles apply to a bullets trajectory, in relation to canting a rifle as with an arrow. the deviation in the opposite direction from the canted trajectory, is proportionate to the time in flight of the bullet and it's weight, as gravitational pull, is function of mass. so the bullet starts out on it's canted trajectory and ends up being pulled off that cant by some amount as gravity pulls the bullet straight down during it's second half of the trajectory, after reaching maximum height of trajectory. for that matter the trajectory in it's upward half, that before reaching maximum height, is also altered a slight amount, because of gravity's directly vertical pull. arrows go through the all same deviation deviations. 
I have a question for you,.....
setting the scene,....you have an infinitely long dead flat and perfectly level surface with a rifle's bore mounted any specific distance above said surface and dead parallel to that surface. now, if you fired a bullet, and dropped a bullet right at the muzzle of the rifle from exactly the same height of the rifle's bore and exactly at the same instant the fired bullet left the barrel,..... which would hit the infinitely flat surface first ?. the bullet going 2800 fps, or the bullet that was dropped at the rifle's muzzle ?.


----------



## ron w

Sasquech said:


> I guess the concept of the peep being out of the ballistic plane and the sight needing to move right and left as distance changes is too difficult a concept to put into words.


 when is the sight "out of the ballistic plane" ?. the ballistic plane and the line of sight are always in the same plane, regardless of amount of cant. they may not be in the same vertical plane when the bow is canted, but the ballistic plane is not vertical, if the bow is canted and is always in alignment with the line of sight, because the line of sight is the ballistic planes radial center when canting the bow.


----------



## Sasquech

Actually Ron that is where we disagree. The ballistic trajectory as you point out is perp to the earth . (By the watt they hit at the same time a feather dropped in a vaccine would also hit at the same time) The peep sight is not over the arrow as the bow is canted therefore it is by definition out of the balistic plane if you dropped the peep out off the string it would miss the arrow in the case of a severe can't using this as an extreem example. Two obviously like minded folks ought to be able to get at the root of this.


----------



## nestly

I really only read the first post, but once the arrow is off the string, it no longer follows the (canted) plane defined by the peep and arrow shaft, it travels in plane that's defined by gravity (ie vertical plane), with allowance for external factors such as wind drift and/or drift cause by the arrow rotation.


----------



## Sasquech

Ok folks the peep is off to the side of the arrow use the extreem case of the now at 45 degrees the peep would be over to the side by 1 inch this means the sight would need to be to the same side slightly to have the arrow and sight line intersect somewhere. Change the distance and they don't intersect unless the sight has traveled right or left with the distance adjustment.


----------



## Sasquech

By the way I agree that once the arrow leaves the bow wether it was canted or not has no impact on arrow flight. I am referring to a phenomenon called parallax. Which must be accounted for. Please explain how it does not apply.


----------



## Rick!

ron w said:


> I have a question for you,.....
> setting the scene,....you have an infinitely long dead flat and perfectly level surface with a rifle's bore mounted any specific distance above said surface and dead parallel to that surface. now, if you fired a bullet, and dropped a bullet right at the muzzle of the rifle from exactly the same height of the rifle's bore and exactly at the same instant the fired bullet left the barrel,..... which would hit the infinitely flat surface first ?. the bullet going 2800 fps, or the bullet that was dropped at the rifle's muzzle ?.


This is an 11th grade physics question and the answer is trivial; y= -1/2*(9.81m/s^2)*time^2 + initial y velocity * time + initial y position, assuming zero drag for y velocity. No x-direction calculations needed. The pretty bullet hits the ground the same time the ugly bullet does. See, no diatribe, no wordy explanation trying to sound smart, no pretentious air, no hubris.

Back on topic, I stopped chanting a long time ago and use affirmations, my results are a lot better now. If things don't go well, I use a primal scream to feel better.


----------



## Sasquech

Totally agree


----------



## ron w

nor does it take a 4 inch long equation,...just common sense.


----------



## nuts&bolts

ron w said:


> nor does it take a 4 inch long equation,...just common sense.


Canting a rifle..and the effects.

http://www.accurateshooter.com/optics/canting-effect-on-point-of-impact/

From the article. 1000 yard shot. 

*Effects of Rifle Canting at Long Range — David Tubb Explains
Eleven-Time NRA National High Power Champion David Tubb knows a bit about long-range shooting. One of the key factors in long-range accuracy is making sure that the tilt/cant of your rifle does not change throughout your shot string. In the clip below, the first in McMillan’s Master Class Video series, David Tubb explains the importance of keeping your rifle level. He explains that, at 1000 yards, your Point of Impact can change dramatically by canting the rifle either right or left. David states that, when shooting at 1000 yards, if your rifle is level and your shot is centered-up on a 72″ (six-foot) square target, you can actually put your next shot OFF PAPER by canting your rifle. That means you can move Point of Impact (POI) three feet or more, just by canting your rifle!*


----------



## nuts&bolts

Canting a rifle, 5 degrees out of vertical to the left...1000 yd shot...308 Winchester round, with 3700 fps muzzle velocity, will land 3.3 inches LEFT.

http://thearmsguide.com/5335/long-range-shooting-external-ballistics-rifle-cant-error/


----------



## nuts&bolts

http://www.riflescopelevel.com/cant_errors.html


----------



## Sasquech

And if you adjust the sight to be on some where with the 5 degree can't les say 500 yards then it will be off 1.675 at 1000 and 1.675 the other way at zero approximately.


----------



## Sasquech

Thanks for the illustrations all this canting makes no difference is true only if you shoot 1 distance


----------



## fanio

ron w said:


> wrong......better go read a bit about ballistics and the gyroscopic affect, a spinning projectile has on the vertical plane of trajectory.


I am well aware of gyroscopic effect. This is important _at long range_ (but only to the tune of about 1" per 100 yards, and that is with MUCH faster spin than arrows). However, gyroscopic effect is always to the right for clockwise spin, and always to the left for anticlockwise. So... anyone can go test this by shooting groups with left helical vs right helical fletches and comparing group positions (using identical cant - say, 1/2 bubble top limb to the right). If your fletching is done to a good standard, I would be willing to bet that there is no difference between your LH and RH helical groups out to 90m.


----------



## ron w

yah, I wouldn't think the typical rate of spin of an arrow would produce enough spin drift to be seen. I would supposed it could be mathematically calculated, but really ,....who cares ?.


----------



## sharkred7

You guys are making this way more difficult than it needs to be. 

!. You CANNOT compare canting a rifle and a bow. With a rifle scope the scope is in a fixed position above the sight and there is not enough crosshair movement to bring the sight perpendicular to the gravitational force which is the only force acting on the projectile, (other than the negligible gyroscopic effect which is a non factor in archery. With a bow sight canted and LEVELED to the gravitational force the sight can be moved over the arrow, almost. If you are canting the bow and the peep sight is not directly over the arrow you can still have perfect left and right at all distance. A severe cant may move a peep only a 1/2 inch off the arrow resulting in a perpendicular line to the target off by 1/2 in at all distances. If you can tell you are off by a 1/2 at 50 or 70 meters you would not even be having this conversation.

2. Practical use has proven all this and doesn't need to be complicated. Level your sight, sight in at short and long range, if your left and right drifts with a level bubble adjust your second axis. Simple as that

All these formulas and comparisons to rifle shooting is apple to oranges. 

John


----------



## fanio

John, it's really about trying to use intentional canting to offset wind drift - i.e. level your sight properly (all axes) and then for e.g medium wind from left at 50m, cant (say) 1/2 bubble top limb left so you don't have to aim off.

Ultimately, practically it doesn't matter why it works, just THAT it works - it does, so practice it and use it on windy days.


----------



## sharkred7

Incorrect fanio, the original question was NOT about shooting in the wind, that is a whole different subject. Canting in the wind with a fixed sight mark not only changes left or right but also vertical impact.

John


----------



## ron w

I guess we have to establish one condition of the question. .......
that is,......is the bow in question in a vertical position when the sight is set in a vertical position,....or is the bow held on ancant, when the sight is set vertically. in OP this detail is not really made clear.
it does make a difference.

anything I posted, assumes that the bow and sight's elevation travel, are in the same vertical plane.


----------



## Sasquech

That was the ops assumption as well the sight rack must be kept parallel to the riser. I was simply trying to discuss the concept everyone maintains that you can set up a slider target rig to be on at all distances with the sight rack vertices it must be parallel to the riser and the scope adjusted to level the bubble. 

Please point out if I am incorrect. Keeping the rack parallel to the riser results in a left right movement of the sight as you adjust the range compensating for the fact that the peep is offset by the can't of the bow.


----------



## erdman41

Sasquech said:


> That was the ops assumption as well the sight rack must be kept parallel to the riser. I was simply trying to discuss the concept everyone maintains that you can set up a slider target rig to be on at all distances with the sight rack vertices it must be parallel to the riser and the scope adjusted to level the bubble.
> 
> Please point out if I am incorrect. Keeping the rack parallel to the riser results in a left right movement of the sight as you adjust the range compensating for the fact that the peep is offset by the can't of the bow.


Why riser why not the string.  If you have spiral cams and the string is vertical the riser is not.


----------



## Sasquech

I have spirals and zero cam lean . But you are correct I am actually referring to the cant being string can't and sight rail parallel to the string . Thanks for the catch some bows are tuned such that the string and sight are not parallel.


----------



## erdman41

In theory I would agree with you but in practical application it doesn't matter.

Say peep is 4" above your arrow and you cant your bow 10 degrees (massive cant). That puts the peep about 5/8" off to the side of the arrow. Most sights I imagine wouldn't allow for that much adjustment. Sight bar has to still be vertical.

Sight in at the farthest distance you are going to shoot. Say 80 yards. The farthest the "sight plane" is going to be off is at the bow. It will continue to get closer and closer until your sighted in distance.

So if you are dead on at 80 and 5/8" off to the side at the bow. You are going to be 5/16" off to the side at 40 yards.

So if you all are going to worry about that go ahead. This is what happens when theorists theorize.


----------



## Sasquech

Always need to insult the person that is trying to wrap their head around a question? Thank you for your explaination. Could have done with out the last sentence.


----------



## bigHUN

Only to add to the above mentioned "peep hight and relation to the plane of travel", we excluding now any human involvement, pure theory talk.
There may be a slight mathematical difference on POI in between canting a bow "around" the arrow axis or just forcing your brain to aim offset...
The difference comes from the d-loop hight, did you mount the nock 100% centered between the cams (OK absolute 38/40 bows in example) or is it slightly offset from center (as with commonly used any other brand bows) ? 
When we cant, the pin moves-swivels in a radius around the axis but when we aim offset that is an XY offset, the point from the first case is not on tangent to a radius unless you have an OK bow.
This above is for case the arrow is still static and resting on the blade. Ones the arrow nock leaves the string then only Mr.Newton law is the only game changer. 
Also I would point out no difference I could prove from Left or Right fletching - regardless of the manufacturing processes, did they started wrapping the carbon fiber strands starting from Left end to the right or opposite direction. 
Bringing now back all the human and weather elements, canting the bow to the bubble or aim offset...practice is a key


----------



## ron w

well, you don't cant the bow around the arrow axis, you cant around the line of sight, that is the axis of the bows cant and the axis of the vertical plane of the arrow's trajectory.


----------



## ron w

erdman41 said:


> In theory I would agree with you but in practical application it doesn't matter.
> 
> Say peep is 4" above your arrow and you cant your bow 10 degrees (massive cant). That puts the peep about 5/8" off to the side of the arrow. Most sights I imagine wouldn't allow for that much adjustment. Sight bar has to still be vertical.
> 
> Sight in at the farthest distance you are going to shoot. Say 80 yards. The farthest the "sight plane" is going to be off is at the bow. It will continue to get closer and closer until your sighted in distance.
> 
> So if you are dead on at 80 and 5/8" off to the side at the bow. You are going to be 5/16" off to the side at 40 yards.
> 
> So if you all are going to worry about that go ahead. This is what happens when theorists theorize.


theoretically true, to some extent. the arrow's trajectory, is a "parabola",...a parabolic curve that has a different radius at the beginning of it's flight in comparison to the end of it's flight, so the "half way point,...the point of highest trajectory, in the vertical plane and maximum deviation from line of sight, in the horizontal plane, is not at the mid point of the distance the arrow travels. 
therefore, "halfing" it's horizontal deviation for a shot that is half as far, is not really what happens to the POI.


----------



## erdman41

ron w said:


> theoretically true, to some extent. the arrow's trajectory, is a "parabola",...a parabolic curve that has a different radius at the beginning of it's flight in comparison to the end of it's flight, so the "half way point,...the point of highest trajectory, in the vertical plane and maximum deviation from line of sight, in the horizontal plane, is not at the mid point of the distance the arrow travels.
> therefore, "halfing" it's horizontal deviation for a shot that is half as far, is not really what happens to the POI.


Nothing said in this post has anything to do with what I posted. Biggest horizontal variation on a bow set up with a cant is at the bow (in my post) The horizontal becomes less and less as the arrow gets to the horizontal sighted in distance . Then it will begin to grow again in the horizontal variation in the opposite direction. The arrow is only going up and coming back down. It's not shooting around corners.

In my example the simple triangle has one leg 80 yards long (sighted in distance) and a 5/8" leg (amount peep is to the side of the arrow). Use that same tiny angle and cut the 80 yd leg down to 40 yd.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> theoretically true, to some extent. the arrow's trajectory, is a "parabola",...a parabolic curve that has a different radius at the beginning of it's flight in comparison to the end of it's flight, so the "half way point,...the point of highest trajectory, in the vertical plane and maximum deviation from line of sight, in the horizontal plane, is not at the mid point of the distance the arrow travels.
> therefore, "halfing" it's horizontal deviation for a shot that is half as far, is not really what happens to the POI.


I believe he's talking only about what is happening on the horizontal plane, which would not include the parabolic curve.


----------



## Padgett

I think one of the things I am basing my thoughts on is that a arrow doesn't drift and you guys that don't believe in shooting with a canted bow do believe the arrow is drifting. If your arrow flight is solid the arrow flies to the target and in a perfectly straight line without any drift left or right, the arrow doesn't care if you are canted or vertical with the ground. 

With this said if you have your bow set up with a vertical riser and you shoot the bow canted yes the arrow is going to hit offline but not because the arrow drifted over there. The arrow hit over there because you canted the bow moving the sight offline with the rest and the arrow hit off to the side. 

In my mind a bow that has solid arrow flight is sending a arrow out of the bow that is going in a straight line and weather or not you have the bow canted all you have to do is have the sight set on top of that direction that the arrow is heading when it is leaving the bow and you are going to be good to go at any distance.


----------



## Padgett

This discussion is similar to the one being made by the center shot people when it comes to tuning, some of the best arrow flight bows I have ever experienced were bows that tuned with the rest crammed next to the riser where the rest was a good quarter inch away from the center shot. I have also seen rests way over the outer edge of the shelf and the bow had awesome arrow flight. Does this mean the arrow is drifting, No. 

Right now we are learning how to put a rest on the bow and completely center it on the shelf in what we believe to be the center shot, then we do other things such as shimming the cams or yoke tuning to force the cams to put the string perfectly behind the arrow so that it tunes with this center shot setting of the rest. So what, the bow could have been tuned by moving the rest left or right or with other little tricks and in the end as long as the arrow leaves the bow cleanly where it isn't wobbling or kicking weird it is not going to drift left or right and it will follow a nice curve to the target. Then all you have to do is dial in the sight and make sure you grip and hold the bow the same way each time and you are good to go.

Again there is no magical force connected to the arrow once it leaves the bow.


----------



## ron w

you can't "not include" the vertical plain when discussing a trajectory, when canted. it's an X vrs. Y proportional bias of function. for every change in horizontal placement, there has to a proportional change in canted vertical plane of trajectory....of course,.... excluding outside, non-integent forces like wind


----------



## Padgett

I totally agree, but what I think we are getting hung up on is that the vertical plane is connected to the arrow by the string being vertical. I think that that vertical plane even though the string is not vertical when the bow is canted is there and it shouldn't be automatically just be connected to the string.

This is why when I shoot with a natural cant when you look at my sights they aren't on top of the arrow when you hold the bow straight up and down vertically. But when I draw the bow back and settle in to that natural can't the sights will be right on top of the arrow if I have it sighted in perfectly.


----------



## Padgett

All of our tuning is based on putting the power stroke right behind the arrow perfectly so basically if you had a little holder that held a ball bearing instead of it being a arrow when you shot the ball bearing out of the bow it would travel perfectly centered over the shelf even with the berger hole. That ball bearing doesn't care if the bow is canted or not and it is going to travel to the target without knowing if the bow was canted or not in a dead on straight line with no drift left or right.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> you can't "not include" the vertical plain when discussing a trajectory, when canted. it's an X vrs. Y proportional bias of function. for every change in horizontal placement, there has to a proportional change in canted vertical plane of trajectory....of course,.... excluding outside, non-integent forces like wind


I agree, but the intentions regarding "canting" the bow for effect, are to adjust or compensate for inconsistencies in conditions that affect the horizontal plane such as with drift. 

I think most everyone would agree that it has minimal affect on vertical trajectory. If you don't, you should go shoot some more. You can throw all the math and technical talk you want at it. The simple fact is that if you have your 2nd axis set up correctly, then hold one shot with the level bubble in the center, followed by another with the bubble split by the left line, the second (canted) shot will hit to the right. This is with no wind.

I believe people overthink this. A typical cant for wind drift is very small. No one would even get close to 30-45 degrees where it would certainly affect trajectory. (noticeably) You can move the POI on the horizontal plane 5"-6" at 50 yds by splitting the bubble. That's probably less than 5 degrees off on the X axis which will also have little, if any affect on the vertical trajectory. It will not hit 5" lower for five inches right. Yes, there is going to be a point where it does affect vertical equal to horizontal, but it is not within that first 5 degrees or so where people effectively use it.


----------



## Padgett

Just had a new thought, it doesn't happen often but it just happened in my little brain. It is related to my thought earlier to clean arrow flight.

If you chose to tune your perfectly vertical bow to have a slightly high tear like a lot of indoor shooters then if you canted your bow you are now going to see a slightly high right tear or high left tear. In fact the more you cant the bow the more of a horizontal tear it becomes. 

But,

If you tune your bow to where it has perfect arrow flight where it has no tear and can shoot bullet holes with a bare shaft at long distances that arrow is leaving the bow very clean with no reason to drift.

Canting the bow would only cause weird arrow issues with the windage if there was poor vertical nock travel, vertical nock travel would turn in to right and left tears if you were canting the bow. But again if you have a bow with no funny lateral or vertical nock travel then the arrow is leaving the bow clean and will travel to the target in a straight line regardless of how you are canting it.


----------



## Padgett

This is why I set my bow up and tune it to have good arrow flight, those two steps never never never have anything to do with the sights. Once I get done achieving good arrow flight I can then spend time moving my sight around up and down and left and right and find the spot where it is dead on. 

So many people that use the walk back tuning method have trouble with this concept because the moment that you accept that walk back tuning is a good idea then you are also accepting that there is some magical force out there that you need to tap into. I have watched people take a bow that I tuned or they tuned to have great arrow flight and then they go back and start shooting and moving the rest looking for some magical setting that gives them a good group. The moment they moved the rest away from the original setting it no longer has the perfect arrow flight that it had before you moved it. It is this acceptance that there is something out there that we can't put a finger on or understand that allows them to do this. 

I do think that there are many guys that don't have the ability to tune out a high tear with a blade rest that would have trouble with their bow at longer distances outside where they get away with it indoor.


----------



## ron w

majical force?.....what.??????...... if you don't believe walk back tuning works, for it's intended purpose, you don't fully understand spine dynamics, or what walk back tuning does, or how to do it....correctly. 
I need some that "majical force",....where do you get it ?.


----------



## nestly

I believe the "magical forces" being references are likely those that while real and measurable in absolute terms, may be disregarded because their relationship to the question about canting and POI are insignificant at the effective range of an ordinary bow/arrow. If you think those forces are germane to the topic, then go ahead and make your point, otherwise what was the point of mentioning them?


----------



## ron w

what "allows" them to it, is the fact that it is their bow !. I have done walk back tuning all my "archery life" and never experienced any of the issues you mention regarding moving the rest during walk back tuning.
that said, I hardly think I qualify as, "one who doesn't know what he's doing" with a bow and don't believe in majic either !


----------



## ron w

a typical cant for wind drift is usually much more severe than what is seen as a natural cant of holding a bow, except of course with self bows and recurves with built in rests or shelves, but we're not really talking about those.


----------



## Lazarus

ron w said:


> majical force?.....what.??????...... if you don't believe walk back tuning works, for it's intended purpose, you don't fully understand spine dynamics, or what walk back tuning does, or how to do it....correctly.


Thinking..........thinking......How do I reconcile the above statement with the statement below taken from (likely) the most helpful tuning post ever posted on AT? And posted by an ASA Shooter Of The Year no less. Thinking.....



tmorelli said:


> 5.	Center shot and nock height- I won’t dwell on these things like most “tuners” do. Here’s why; I let the bow tell me what it wants during tuning and early in its life. Nock height to me is defined by the way the bow aims and tunes. Center shot is where it tunes…not a measurement. I do not use walk back or French tuning at all, ever.
> 
> *a.	If you think you need walk back tuning, I’m going to challenge you. Check your sight setup (2nd axis specifically). Check your shot…are you centering in the peep the same as distance increases? And lastly, set your windage at the long range first. Then move up and see if you still think you need to move your rest via “walk back” tuning. Walkback tuning implies that there is one magic location that a bow will not drift left or right with increasing distance. This is simply not correct.*


----------



## bigHUN

*A magical force is this*









My answer to some discussion earlier:
Properly spined arrow...no need to french tune and no need to walk back tune, just put the resting point to nominal location 100% centered between cams and GtG. 
Now just FYI, some may say "oh lucky you that is a STS can not be done with a cable guarded bow, BS yes it can be done and I have four common brand - cable guard - bows hanging in my basement with a centershot centered between cams. I don't use those anymore, don't like some limitations I can't go around with any tricks.

Back to the OP:



Sasquech said:


> 1) there is a plane defined by the peep and the arrow shaft *CORRECT*
> 2) Now the sight aiming point must be in the same plane for the target to hit the point being defined by the peep and sight intersection to the target. *CORRECT*
> 3) if the bow is canted and the sight bar is setup vertical this means that there can only be one point where the plane of arrow peep can intersect with the sight. *CORRECT*
> 4) If the sight point (pin or dot or ring ) does not travel in the plane at all times during its up and down adjustment for distance you will get right and lefts either side from the intersection point. *CORRECT*
> The bow string and sight vertical travel must be parallel and the aiming point always in the plane . Therefore; the bow must not be canted to prevent deviations at different distances. *CORRECT*
> Will one of you kind fellows please point out how this is incorrect. *CORRECT* (why would you assume any incorrect )


Canting the bow vs offseting the aiming point (for purpose of in example side wind corrections) are totally different results at the POI, but I believe this wasn't a question rereading the OP.
The arrow "always" travels in a plane (and this plain is vertical following the Newton law) defined between 3 points (starting point, middle of the travel and ending point). If we put the sight pin/dot/ring in the same plane all the time for multiple distances the POI will follow the same vertical plane, the arrows will hit the same vertical line.

Editing for forth time, got drifted away in same way as many folks earlier, plus "my wife is renovating" a relatively new looking kitchen and I can't keep my undivided attention to the OP ;\
Now lets jump back to the nominal (or call it matching) spine for a given powerstroke, 
Can we limit to which side the shaft to *start* benting? Yes we can, and me personally don't care if my arrows tear high on the paper but I like to have my arrows group tight longest possible distance.
Next, let see when and how could the arrow not ravel in a vertical plane?
over -or- underspined shafts have some artifacts, and the biggest voodoo is that they tend to steer away from the planned aiming plane and after some distance travelled coming back or most likely keep moving to the opposite side if the distance is long enough, this why folks use a walkback tune, I am considering a french tune a next step up, but the ultimate piece in mind comes with shooting a perfect spined arrow.


----------



## Sasquech

Folks it was simple ignore spine wind zero wind dead calm perfectly tuned bow etc. just a canted bow because an archer likes it canted let's say 10 degrees for simplicity no other variables assume a hooter shooter holding the perfect angle etc. reset keep it simple.


----------



## ron w

if you cant the bow, say 15 degrees, the plane of thrust is now deviated from true vertical by 15 degrees, and the arrow's plane of trajectory reflects that same deviation . the line that defines the plane of trajectory,... the line that intersects the three points you referred to above, will be in the same plane as the plane of thrust of the bow. consider that as the arrow sits on the rest, it does not sit on just one point of contact, it's sits on two points and those two points are at right angles to the line of thrust, thus one point of contact is higher than the other, because the bow is canted. this originates the arrow's plane of trajectory to be 90 degrees to the plane of thrust of the bow, thus, the plane of trajectory is canted the same amount as the bow is canted. the plane of thrust and the plane of trajectory are always parallel.


----------



## fanio

Your reference to "plane of thrust" implies that the "thrust" (i.e. power stroke) of the bow has a component other than straight through the shaft immediately before the arrow leaves the string. 

This would require non-straight (let's call it "vertical") nock travel at that time. Whilst this _might_ be possible it is very unusual - and would imply massively different amounts of stress on the top limb(s) vs bottom limb(s). Experimental evidence of nock travel also shows that for most compounds nock travel just prior to string separation is perfectly straight (this is so even where there is quite a lot of nock travel near full draw).

That aside, could we try the following thought experiment to see if we are really saying the same thing or not? 

If you take a protractor, and imagine that as representing the trajectory of an arrow (I know it's a half circle not a parabola but for these purposes it doesn't matter). Holding the bow vertically, the path of the arrow would be straight away from you, and if the straight edge of the protractor is on a flat surface (e.g. a table, etc) with the two "corners" of the protractor at the "bow" and the "target", then (now bending down and looking at table level towards the target i.e. from along the bottom edge where the 0 deg and the 180 deg marks are), presumably - given the bow is vertical - you would agree it looks like this |? 

Do you think that canting the bow to the right would make the protractor look like this | or like this / ? Obviously the 0deg is fixed, but can you see that it is possible to move the 180deg to the right whilst keeping the protractor in a position so it looks like this | - but that to see that you would have to move your head to the left a bit (


----------



## Rick!

Had Sasquech conditions last night and shot to determine if math and physics determined where the arrow went when the bow was canted or whether magic ruled the day.

Turns out the POI of a 2.5 degree cant is within the scatter of my groups at 50 yards with my hunting rig. Check.
At 2.5 degrees cant, I can hold my head relatively vertical and sight properly.

For grins, I canted the bow far enough to move the arrow 4" at 50 yards. Math would say that this is over 10 degrees and less than 15 degrees. Check. 
To sight properly with this amount of cant, _*for me*_, I had to tilt my head in the direction of the cant to get my touch points correct. Interesting. 

Cant the bow significantly, sight picture can be aligned, arrow is pointed a little crooked relative to the sight line, it's really that simple. 

Didn't see much bubbling on the Men's bronze medal match at Antalya in 8mph winds...hmmm.

For me, math works. I think folks need to to shoot more and argue less. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## ron w

like this /..........exactly,.... using a protractor was a good demonstrative analogy., that is exactly what I have contended from day 1. 
now, taking that demonstration two step further......
the line of sight is dead straight and intersects the radioed edge of the protractor at two points along it radius, or parabola, in the case of a arrow's trajectory. the line of sight, whichis dead straight, is the axis around which the cant rotates.

therefore,......

as long as the shot is sighted to the distance being shot, the arrow will arrive at the same POI as when the bow is held truly vertical, with the exception of a bit of deviation from the fact that gravity's pull is straight down and the arrows trajectory is now a canted plane, so there will be some deviation from that plane (very little) because gravity works in the realm of "time in flight" and will pull the arrow off it's intended canted trajectory, to the same side of the cant, as the bow's top limb is canted. this amount of deviation will vary by the velocity produced by the bow.

you can prove it at the range.....

take bow that is well sighted in for 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 yards. cant it as much as you want, stand about 5 yards away from the 10 yard target, and shoot all 5 shots at their respective distance's target from that spot, keeping the bow at the same cant as well as you can. each shot is now, 5 yards short in length so the arrow's POI will be high and to the side that the bow is canted in increasingly greater amounts in both planes on the 10 and 20 yard target, because the arrow is rising from the shot elevation and decreasingly smaller amount in both planes on the 40 and 50 yard targets, because the arrow is descending from the maximum height of trajectory, with the 30 yard target's POI, showing roughly the maximum deviation in both planes, of all five POI's. if you stand at the spot that you shot from and look at all the targets in line, you will see that the POI's form roughly the same angle as you held your cant when shooting. 

again, there fore....., 

the plane of the arrow's trajectory reflects the plane of thrust and the amount of cant the bow is held to. 

the plane of the arrow's canted trajectory is always parallel to the bow's plane of thrust and the bow's string, because the bows string, represents the bow's plane of thrust.
I've had enough of this, I have explained it several times in as many ways as I can without illustration. if you can't figure it out, i'm sorry for your lack of understanding, but i'm done.


----------



## ron w

Rick! said:


> Had Sasquech conditions last night and shot to determine if math and physics determined where the arrow went when the bow was canted or whether magic ruled the day.
> 
> Turns out the POI of a 2.5 degree cant is within the scatter of my groups at 50 yards with my hunting rig. Check.
> At 2.5 degrees cant, I can hold my head relatively vertical and sight properly.
> 
> For grins, I canted the bow far enough to move the arrow 4" at 50 yards. Math would say that this is over 10 degrees and less than 15 degrees. Check.
> To sight properly with this amount of cant, _*for me*_, I had to tilt my head in the direction of the cant to get my touch points correct. Interesting.
> 
> Cant the bow significantly, sight picture can be aligned, arrow is pointed a little crooked relative to the sight line, it's really that simple.
> 
> Didn't see much bubbling on the Men's bronze medal match at Antalya in 8mph winds...hmmm.
> 
> For me, math works. I think folks need to to shoot more and argue less. Your mileage may vary.


 "shoot more and talk less".,,,,, I knew this issue existed before I shot the first arrow I ever shot back in 1974. you don't need to shoot to learn this or know this.


----------



## Padgett

Hey Ronw, of all the things that I have used I think the Ball Bearing one is the on that helps me really have a grasp on things. When I think about a ball bearing that is sitting in a little holder and how it would suck if the bow wasn't tuned very well and it might get shot into my hand or my sight it really opens up my brain to what is really going on. 

That Ball bearing once I have the bow tuned is going to go right straight above the center shot even with the berger hole right where a arrow would go if it was being used because the power stroke of the bow is right behind the ball bearing and I am telling you that it doesn't care what angle either vertical or not. That bearing is going to fly in a perfectly straight line and all you have to do is move the windage so that it is hitting dead on and it will hit dead on at any distance from that point on. 

Your brain is wrapped around attaching the vertical plane that a arrow is traveling on the way to the target to the bow string being vertical and this is what is holding you back.


----------



## Padgett

This is why so many guys may have adopted a vertical bow setting because in years past if they couldn't get a bow to tune without a absolutely no vertical nock travel they may have had to live with a slightly high tear and for that shooter shooting with a natural cant would cause problems getting a bow dialed in from 4 yards to 80 yards. 

Why? Because, as the arrow is leaving the bow there is a certain amount of poor arrow flight that the bow has produced and then the arrow fletching for the first few yards of the shot has to do its job and correct it, once the arrow gets corrected it can then travel on to the target smoothly but that correction phase of the early part is going to cause the arrow to hit differently up close as compared to down range. 

Now that we have bows that have little to no lateral or vertical nock travel issues and string sets that hold a tune it has opened up this choice of a natural cant to us.


----------



## Padgett

Another way to help with this concept is to completely take the string out of your mind along with the bow and only have a arrow that is sitting on a rest up by the point of the arrow and there is a little 1/8 inch diameter thing that pushes the arrow forward using the same force curve that a bow would give a arrow. that little thing is pushing perfect straight forward with no vertical or lateral weird stuff, it is just pushing straight forward. 

Now, the question is does the arrow care if that rest is perfectly vertical or canted? 

No it does not, the arrow rest only has a couple jobs to do and one of them is to hold the arrow and the other job is to not push the arrow offline with something like fletching contact. 

So if the rest is perfectly vertical then the two sides of the rest are holding the arrow equally and the arrow is very stable on the rest with no chance of falling off. 

If the arrow rest is canted to the right then the arrow rest right edge is holding more weight than the left side of the rest but it is still doing the same job.

At this point as long as the force that propels the arrow is perfectly behind the arrow what difference would it make if the rest is canted or vertical? The answer is none, the arrow could care less if the rest is vertical or canted.

Now the moment you but a bow back in charge of propelling the arrow you have only added one thing to the equation because there are only two things touching the arrow, the string and the rest and we just learned the the arrow doesn't care about the position of the rest as long as the arrow doesn't fall off. The only other thing touching the arrow is the string. So now comes the question how good is the power stroke of your bow and how clean is the arrow flight as it leaves the bow. If the arrow leaves the bow perfectly straight with nothing to be corrected then weather or not the bow is canted means nothing to your poi and you are good to go.

If you have poor nock travel that in return gives you poor arrow flight then that arrow flight will have to be corrected for a few yards and then the arrow can continue on down range. The worse the arrow flight the longer it will take for the arrow to recover and the worse the poi.


----------



## ron w

padgett said:


> hey ronw, of all the things that i have used i think the ball bearing one is the on that helps me really have a grasp on things. When i think about a ball bearing that is sitting in a little holder and how it would suck if the bow wasn't tuned very well and it might get shot into my hand or my sight it really opens up my brain to what is really going on.
> 
> That ball bearing once i have the bow tuned is going to go right straight above the center shot even with the berger hole right where a arrow would go if it was being used because the power stroke of the bow is right behind the ball bearing and i am telling you that it doesn't care what angle either vertical or not. That bearing is going to fly in a perfectly straight line and all you have to do is move the windage so that it is hitting dead on and it will hit dead on at any distance from that point on.
> 
> Your brain is wrapped around attaching the vertical plane that a arrow is traveling on the way to the target to the bow string being vertical and this is what is holding you back.


 wrong


----------



## ron w

Padgett said:


> Another way to help with this concept is to completely take the string out of your mind along with the bow and only have a arrow that is sitting on a rest up by the point of the arrow and there is a little 1/8 inch diameter thing that pushes the arrow forward using the same force curve that a bow would give a arrow. that little thing is pushing perfect straight forward with no vertical or lateral weird stuff, it is just pushing straight forward.
> 
> Now, the question is does the arrow care if that rest is perfectly vertical or canted?
> 
> No it does not, the arrow rest only has a couple jobs to do and one of them is to hold the arrow and the other job is to not push the arrow offline with something like fletching contact.
> 
> So if the rest is perfectly vertical then the two sides of the rest are holding the arrow equally and the arrow is very stable on the rest with no chance of falling off.
> 
> If the arrow rest is canted to the right then the arrow rest right edge is holding more weight than the left side of the rest but it is still doing the same job.
> 
> At this point as long as the force that propels the arrow is perfectly behind the arrow what difference would it make if the rest is canted or vertical? The answer is none, the arrow could care less if the rest is vertical or canted.
> 
> Now the moment you but a bow back in charge of propelling the arrow you have only added one thing to the equation because there are only two things touching the arrow, the string and the rest and we just learned the the arrow doesn't care about the position of the rest as long as the arrow doesn't fall off. The only other thing touching the arrow is the string. So now comes the question how good is the power stroke of your bow and how clean is the arrow flight as it leaves the bow. If the arrow leaves the bow perfectly straight with nothing to be corrected then weather or not the bow is canted means nothing to your poi and you are good to go.
> 
> If you have poor nock travel that in return gives you poor arrow flight then that arrow flight will have to be corrected for a few yards and then the arrow can continue on down range. The worse the arrow flight the longer it will take for the arrow to recover and the worse the poi.


 Padgett, look at your rest. it has two points of contact with the shaft,.... if it didn't, the arrow would not stay on the rest. I've never seen a rest that has only one point of contact with the shaft.......generally, i'd bet they wouldn't work very good of the didn't have two points of contact,....what do you think ?. 
last time I took math, 2+1 equaled 3.


----------



## Padgett

I love thinking about all this stuff and I will remind you that I am the guy that totally stood and debated with more than one company and pro shooter on your side of this subject. The difference in me and you is that I am totally ready to actually learn something new and admit that I was wrong and then spend the time once I learn something new to actually really dive in and learn the cool stuff that had been right in front of me. 

This is one of the subjects that I have switched boats on and I am so glad that I have been in this discussion because the ball bearing analogy is something that has actually really helped my understanding of it, I have also really struggled with the whole string angle thing and had a hard time letting go of the string must be vertical for the power of the bow that is given to the string to be perfectly straight behind the arrow. A string does not have to be straight behind the string to get that done but can't have any lateral or vertical funny business.


----------



## Padgett

Yeah, I am a Math teacher.

That is why I married a english major because my grammar sucks really bad.


----------



## Padgett

I guess in your world a wisker biscuit has 200 points of contact so is a totally different animal, in my world I still see one point of contact when referring to this discussion.


----------



## ron w

Padgett said:


> I love thinking about all this stuff and I will remind you that I am the guy that totally stood and debated with more than one company and pro shooter on your side of this subject. The difference in me and you is that I am totally ready to actually learn something new and admit that I was wrong and then spend the time once I learn something new to actually really dive in and learn the cool stuff that had been right in front of me.
> 
> This is one of the subjects that I have switched boats on and I am so glad that I have been in this discussion because the ball bearing analogy is something that has actually really helped my understanding of it, I have also really struggled with the whole string angle thing and had a hard time letting go of the string must be vertical for the power of the bow that is given to the string to be perfectly straight behind the arrow. A string does not have to be straight behind the string to get that done but can't have any lateral or vertical funny business.


 so am I, and when I do learn something I don't already know, I'll be the first to announce my gratitude or correction,....... which I have done several times on here.. the difference between me and you, is that I am sure of what I talk about in archery for the most part, because I don't generally open my mouth unless it is something I know i'm correct about.
you see, there's been many people on here that have given up and left because a few people don't understand or agree with them. that doesn't bother me and I will continue to debate my point, if I know for certain, I am correct.


----------



## ron w

Padgett said:


> I guess in your world a wisker biscuit has 200 points of contact so is a totally different animal, in my world I still see one point of contact when referring to this discussion.


 no , my world is a bit more detail and accuracy oriented,.....a whisker biscuit has only approximately 100 points of contact, (by your account of having 200 points of contact) ,..... because the hole in a whisker biscuit has to be larger than the shaft it is supporting and therefore only approximately half of it's whiskers are in contact with the shaft at any given time. further more, ... it is just exactly your generalization that we differ on. while you say "one point", the reality is the two points that exist, is exactly why the plane of trajectory gets canted, parallel to the bow's cant. it is your failure to visualize this detail, that makes you disagree.
I find it odd that someone who is essentially "trained in a world of detail" has such a hard time with recognizing details that are eminently present.


----------



## fanio

So if the string angle affects trajectory, what shape is a crossbow bolt's trajectory?


----------



## erdman41

fanio said:


> So if the string angle affects trajectory, what shape is a crossbow bolt's trajectory?


I'm not shooting one. The arrow will do a 360 and hit you in the back.


----------



## Padgett

I am so proud of archery talk and the lessons that it has presented to me to learn right here on my keyboard and at home shooting in my back yard, little kids wonder about how math and science actually touch our daily lives. I spent 20 years in the classroom teaching common denominators and other little things but this thread is where the real applications are at and you get to take a step back and look at something a second or third time.

For me it was easy 4 years ago to debate with tim gillingham and the other owner of hamskea on this subject that there was no way that you could shoot accurately with a natural cant, I mean it is obvious that the bow must be vertical right? I went home so convinced after that asa tournament that I had made my point but I layed in bed and sit at my desk at work and just allowed my brain to look at the whole issue from every angle that I could. What kept me going is that a top pro shooter Tim Gillingham sure seemed really convinced that he knew what he was talking about. In the end it took a good month or so and I attended another asa tournament and by that time I had started to see the truth.

To me that is what a person has to do to actually grow and learn and that is what I try to do, I fail most of the time but there are those good days when the light comes on and I am good to go.


----------



## Padgett

I am so proud of archery talk and the lessons that it has presented to me to learn right here on my keyboard and at home shooting in my back yard, little kids wonder about how math and science actually touch our daily lives. I spent 20 years in the classroom teaching common denominators and other little things but this thread is where the real applications are at and you get to take a step back and look at something a second or third time.

For me it was easy 4 years ago to debate with tim gillingham and the other owner of hamskea on this subject that there was no way that you could shoot accurately with a natural cant, I mean it is obvious that the bow must be vertical right? I went home so convinced after that asa tournament that I had made my point but I layed in bed and sit at my desk at work and just allowed my brain to look at the whole issue from every angle that I could. What kept me going is that a top pro shooter Tim Gillingham sure seemed really convinced that he knew what he was talking about. In the end it took a good month or so and I attended another asa tournament and by that time I had started to see the truth.

To me that is what a person has to do to actually grow and learn and that is what I try to do, I fail most of the time but there are those good days when the light comes on and I am good to go.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Saw some posts of Walk Back and French tuning. You know, the procedures are nothing more than setting center shot to it's best. No denying Tony is one fine shooter, but then Levi Morgan gives of using his form of French tuning, 20 and 50 yards. I've used French tuning since around 2002 and it just plain gets the job done whether short distance, 9 feet and 30 yards, or 9 feet and 50 yards and longer. My bows have been binary bows since the summer of 2010. Binary bows are not the friendliest for bare shaft tuning and I failed. I went back to French tune my bow 2 days before a 3D and won or took 2nd place. Always missing from French Tuning is after you get done setting center shot is coming right back and try adjusting the rest or nocking point to see if groups can be tightened.

The fact is, the more you use X tuning procedure the more you know how to make it work and/or make it work for you. 

Of canting, I don't. For wind I'd rather play the wind, hold into it, and the only time I've done this is for Outdoor target. The Field ranges I've shot have been in wooded areas and when out in the open most targets were of distances 35 yards or less.


----------



## ron w

fanio said:


> So if the string angle affects trajectory, what shape is a crossbow bolt's trajectory?


 the string doesn't affect the trajectory, ..... sight alignment does. "vertical plane of trajectory" and the actual trajectory produced by shooting an arrow, are two completely different aspects of ballistics.
tell me,...... how does a bow , or a crossbow, produce the trajectory it imparts on the arrow ?


----------



## Padgett

Your last post just proved that canting a bow is ok, you just said that the string doesn't affect the trajectory and that the sight alignment does which is what I have been saying since this whole thread started.

In all reality the difference in me and you is that you have things in your head that are set in stone because you have always done it that way and you work really hard to prove it to be true. My suggestion to you is to actually set your bow up with a natural cant and actually shoot with it for a few months and see the truth, It isn't hard to do. You just change your first axis a little and then you change your rear bar so that the bow wants to sit with the bubble centered to that natural cant and then you sight your bow in. 

This is something that I actually did back in early january with my 3d bow, this discussion has happened many times here on archery talk and I had always wanted to do it and so I spent a good 30 minutes focusing on closing my eyes and letting the bow settle in where my grip and front arm felt really good. It only took a slight natural cant and I changed my rear bar a little and then changed my first axis to set it and I was good to go. I shot with that bow with that setup for a good couple months and really enjoyed the shooting with it and it performed just like it was supposed to at all distances.


----------



## ron w

Padgett, the string has no affect on trajectory, it is just an object that pushes the arrow. what does affect trajectory is the sight alignment , as I said. there is a difference between the "string" and the "plane of thrust", the string operates on. I never said they were the same thing,....ever. nor have I ever said that canting the bow negatively affects it's accuracy. I have said, however, that the effects on a arrow's trajectory from a natural cant is considerably less that the effects form a deliberate cant for shooting in a cross wind. 
stop trying to discount my posts, by fabricating and twisting details, that I haven't inferred and lying by omission to support it....it just doesn't work.
what I say, that is "set in stone" as you assert, is set in stone, because the statements are correct and undeniably proven. when they are said as such, the only way to discount them, is to fabricate and twist their inference. 

I challenge you to scientifically discount and provide viable support of the discount, anything I said in this entire thread.


----------



## Padgett

Please, for the love of god simply answer a simple question. I just read over your beginning posts about 5 times and am trying make sense of them.

I Shawn Padgett believe that you can pick a cant that you enjoy shooting with. Then set that cant to your sight using first axis and you can shoot just as accurately as a guy that sets his bow perfectly vertical.

Do you believe that this is a true statement?


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, I think things are getting a little bent.


----------



## cbrunson

Padgett said:


> Please, for the love of god simply answer a simple question. I just read over your beginning posts about 5 times and am trying make sense of them.
> 
> I Shawn Padgett believe that you can pick a cant that you enjoy shooting with. Then set that cant to your sight using first axis and you can shoot just as accurately as a guy that sets his bow perfectly vertical.
> 
> Do you believe that this is a true statement?



As long as your 2nd axis is adjusted to match. (depending on how the 2nd axis is adjusted) The rack, or rail, whatever you want to call it on your sight, needs to be parallel with the angle of trajectory. For those who seem to be confused, trajectory in arrow flight is only vertical. When you cant the bow, it is changing the angle which the arrow leaves the bow because the pivot point is at your hand, not the rest. The arrow doesn't magically curve right or left because you canted the bow.


----------



## ron w

Padgett said:


> Please, for the love of god simply answer a simple question. I just read over your beginning posts about 5 times and am trying make sense of them.
> 
> I Shawn Padgett believe that you can pick a cant that you enjoy shooting with. Then set that cant to your sight using first axis and you can shoot just as accurately as a guy that sets his bow perfectly vertical.
> 
> Do you believe that this is a true statement?


 absolutely, and I never said otherwise....as long as the shot distance is the same as the sight's set distance. I cant help that you can't visualize the details that I described.


----------



## Padgett

Yeppers.


----------



## Lazarus

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, I think things are getting a little bent.


:set1_rolf2:

Post of the day right there. :cheers:


----------



## ron w

cbrunson said:


> As long as your 2nd axis is adjusted to match. (depending on how the 2nd axis is adjusted) The rack, or rail, whatever you want to call it on your sight, needs to be parallel with the angle of trajectory. For those who seem to be confused, trajectory in arrow flight is only vertical. When you cant the bow, it is changing the angle which the arrow leaves the bow because the pivot point is at your hand, not the rest. The arrow doesn't magically curve right or left because you canted the bow.


 consider as done previously, that the radiused edge of a protractor represents the trajectory of an arrow in flight.....that is as clearly a demonstrative as we can establish and a very good one, at that !. we know this shape (a constant radius) is not actua, because a projectile's trajectory is a parabola,....l but for demonstrative purposes, any curved line will work. 
now, as before, with the protractor, sitting on it's straight edge, if you cant the protractor, it demonstrates what happens to the arrow's trajectory as it is canted. if you look along the protractor's length, you will see that the radiused edge of the protractor, which represents an arrow's trajectory, forms a curving line in respect to your line of sight, which is dead straight at all times. 
so.....
the arrow's trajectory, does "magically" (as you put it) curve, as it's plane of trajectory is canted.
my God, I showed this thread in it's entirety to my son and told him to read through it and let me know what you think, who doesn't hunt, doesn't even shoot a bow or a gun, and he understood what i'm trying to explain, completely.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> consider as done previously, that the radiused edge of a protractor represents the trajectory of an arrow in flight.....that is as clearly a demonstrative as we can establish and a very good one, at that !. we know this shape (a constant radius) is not actua, because a projectile's trajectory is a parabola,....l but for demonstrative purposes, any curved line will work.
> now, as before, with the protractor, sitting on it's straight edge, if you cant the protractor, it demonstrates what happens to the arrow's trajectory as it is canted. if you look along the protractor's length, you will see that the radiused edge of the protractor, which represents an arrow's trajectory, forms a curving line in respect to your line of sight, which is dead straight at all times.
> so.....
> the arrow's trajectory, does "magically" (as you put it) curve, as it's plane of trajectory is canted.
> my God, I showed this thread in it's entirety to my son and told him to read through it and let me know what you think, who doesn't hunt, doesn't even shoot a bow or a gun, and he understood what i'm trying to explain, completely.


The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> consider as done previously, that the radiused edge of a protractor represents the trajectory of an arrow in flight.....that is as clearly a demonstrative as we can establish and a very good one, at that !. we know this shape (a constant radius) is not actua, because a projectile's trajectory is a parabola,....l but for demonstrative purposes, any curved line will work.
> now, as before, with the protractor, sitting on it's straight edge, if you cant the protractor, it demonstrates what happens to the arrow's trajectory as it is canted. if you look along the protractor's length, you will see that the radiused edge of the protractor, which represents an arrow's trajectory, forms a curving line in respect to your line of sight, which is dead straight at all times.
> so.....
> the arrow's trajectory, does "magically" (as you put it) curve, as it's plane of trajectory is canted.
> my God, I showed this thread in it's entirety to my son and told him to read through it and let me know what you think, who doesn't hunt, doesn't even shoot a bow or a gun, and he understood what i'm trying to explain, completely.


No analogies. No big words. It’s simple mechanics. The protractor example would only work if gravity didn't take over at the peak of the arc.

From the shooters eye if you could see arrow flight, it would appear to be curving both vertically and horizontally. That is because you are changing the angle the arrow is leaving the bow by canting it. That view would show an arc upward and to one side. I completely understand your presumption. However, if you switch to the bird’s eye view, you will see that it is in fact coming off at an angle and following a straight path to the point of impact. You would only see the parabolic path (trajectory) from the side view.

If you adjust the sight for the specified distance, regardless of the cant (within limits of course), the arrow will only be off horizontally because of the angle it is coming off of the bow. It is not curving to the side.


----------



## erdman41




----------



## cbrunson

erdman41 said:


> View attachment 2762690


Good pic. 

As long as the sight stays true to gravity, there shouldn't be any magic curve balls.


----------



## ron w

gravity "takes over", obviously, ...the arrow starts on a downward path, gravity is the only reason it would do that. but it doesn't completely cancel the dynamic link between the arrow's FOC and it's ends, to maintain the course the arrow is on because of, it can't because gravity can't stop it's rotation or it's lineal acceleration, until the arrow hits the ground or the target.
it's obvious all this is way over your head, otherwise it would be evidently clear. 
as I challenged Padgett, I challenge you to scientifically dispute and disprove what I have posted. 

what I find ironic,....even comical to an extent,...... is that out of all the people on the forum, one who boasts about as good a shot as he is and proclaims to know a lot about archery , and math teacher, one who lives by rules and details, are the only two that seem to dispute what is basically math oriented and fundamental knowledge about an arrow's flight.
if you think I am wrong, ....dig into it and try to put and end to my ramblings with scientific proof. if you would, you'd find that you have nothing to stand on, because what I've posted is fact, not opinion. the information is out there,....I now it is,....I don't have to lead you by the hand, you probably know more about computers than I do.


----------



## nestly

Is there supposed to be an assumption that a rear string sight (peep) is being used in the "gravity drop" picture?


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> gravity "takes over", obviously, ...the arrow starts on a downward path, gravity is the only reason it would do that. but it doesn't completely cancel the dynamic link between the arrow's FOC and it's ends, to maintain the course the arrow is on because of, it can't because gravity can't stop it's rotation or it's lineal acceleration, until the arrow hits the ground or the target.
> it's obvious all this is way over your head, otherwise it would be evidently clear.
> as I challenged Padgett, I challenge you to scientifically dispute and disprove what I have posted.
> 
> what I find ironic,....even comical to an extent,...... is that out of all the people on the forum, one who boasts about as good a shot as he is and proclaims to know a lot about archery , and math teacher, one who lives by rules and details, are the only two that seem to dispute what is basically math oriented and fundamental knowledge about an arrow's flight.
> if you think I am wrong, ....dig into it and try to put and end to my ramblings with scientific proof. if you would, you'd find that you have nothing to stand on, because what I've posted is fact, not opinion. the information is out there,....I now it is,....I don't have to lead you by the hand, you probably know more about computers than I do.


Actually, I'm pretty sure you are just trolling again. I'm pretty sure everyone else knows it too.


----------



## ron w

nestly said:


> Is there supposed to be an assumption that a rear string sight (peep) is being used in the "gravity drop" picture?


 what ?. explain your question, please


----------



## ron w

cbrunson said:


> Actually, I'm pretty sure you are just trolling again. I'm pretty sure everyone else knows it too.


 i'm truly not trolling,..... I have no reason to,...... if you can prove me wrong, i'll gladly accept that proof and thank-you kindly for educating me. it might appear as trolling to someone who can't attempt to explain why they believe what they do.....or, to try and suggest that I might be doing something that would get me banned.
that's one of the differences I possess. I research what I learn and make the decision to believe it, or not to believe it, by my understanding of engineering theory, physics and application of engineering principles.
I'm dead serious....... if you can prove me wrong, all the better for the forum,...... we all learn something new about the science of archery.


----------



## nestly

In the "gravity drop" picture, there are two sight housings. (the higher one appears to be black, the lower one appears to some shade of blue/gray) I only see one bowstring, and it's canted at the same angle as the bow, as would be expected. If there's a peep in the string anywhere above the arrow nock, the there would be a significant POI difference between using the upper and lower sight setting in the image if the bubble was kept level for both shots.


----------



## fanio

I think the imagery of the bird's eye view is a very good one.

from the top it follows a perfectly straight line. like this:

target
|
|
|
archer

when you can the bow, the parth looks like this (from the top)

target
/
/
/
archer

from archer's view, this looks like this

n
/ \
/ \ 
/ \
archer target

so it looks like it has curved to the right

but actually, if you stand at the archer's left shoulder, you will see this

| 
|
archer 
target
(arrow straight up and straight down, just in a new plane; looking along the straight edge of the "protractor" where the arrow from above flies along the straight edge, the protractor still looks like this: | )


----------



## cbrunson

fanio said:


> I think the imagery of the bird's eye view is a very good one.
> 
> (arrow straight up and straight down, just in a new plane; looking along the straight edge of the "protractor" where the arrow from above flies along the straight edge, the protractor still looks like this: | )


Exactly. Good description.


----------



## erdman41

TNMAN said:


> Where is the pic of Oldpro's sight when you need it?


----------



## Rick!

ron w said:


> Brunson, further more,
> my proof is in the fact that there is no disputing proof to what I've posted, because it is factual. you can blow steam all you want, that doesn't change the truth. if you cannot come up with factually supported proof that what I say is wrong, .....you're just talking to hear yourself. there is factual evidence to what I say, ......it is not my responsibility to disprove or prove it, I am not the one disputing it.


Better have yer kid do more proof reading.



ron w said:


> theoretically true, to some extent. the arrow's trajectory, is a "parabola",...a parabolic curve that has a different radius at the beginning of it's flight in comparison to the end of it's flight, so the "half way point,...the point of highest trajectory, in the vertical plane and maximum deviation from line of sight, in the horizontal plane, is not at the mid point of the distance the arrow travels.
> therefore, "halfing" it's horizontal deviation for a shot that is half as far, is not really what happens to the POI.


OT2 kinda makes it look like halfway to me, and then I would use similar triangles, or trig, or blasphemy.










ron w said:


> if you cant the bow, say 15 degrees, the *plane of thrust* is now deviated from true vertical by 15 degrees, and the *arrow's plane of trajectory reflects that same deviation* . the line that defines *the plane of trajectory*,... the line that intersects the three points you referred to above, will be in the same plane as *the plane of thrust* of the bow. consider that as the arrow sits on the rest, it does not sit on just one point of contact, it's sits on two points and those two points are at *right angles to the line of thrust*, thus one point of contact is higher than the other, because the bow is canted. this originates the *arrow's plane of trajectory to be 90 degrees to the plane of thrust *of the bow, thus, the plane of trajectory is canted the same amount as the bow is canted. *the plane of thrust and the plane of trajectory are always parallel*.


Riddler to Batman: When are parallel planes 90 degrees to each other?
Batman: ron put you up this, didn't he? It's a universal law that dynamically couples a canted crossbow with a peep on it. 




erdman41 said:


> Classic pigeon chess


 

Cant this!


----------



## Sasquech

This does not need ballistics they are the same for both arrow flights although the rest forces are different. Ignore them the peep is off to one side to line up the sight and arrow to intersect at a distance the sight must also be to the side. As the distance changes the amount of offset for the sight changes. Keep it very simple


----------



## Sasquech

Respect each other this was a simple two dimensional question we over complicate everything


----------



## erdman41

Sasquech said:


> This does not need ballistics they are the same for both arrow flights although the rest forces are different. Ignore them the peep is off to one side to line up the sight and arrow to intersect at a distance the sight must also be to the side. As the distance changes the amount of offset for the sight changes. Keep it very simple


That is what I described in post 62. The peep offset was 5/8" in my example. P3 was 80 yards. It is really that simple. Is the sight really only dead on at one distance yes. Are you off to the side enough at other distances to notice no.

I dought you would even be able to tell or test this using a hooter shooter.

How much of the target are you covering with your dot or pin? 10 times 20 times the amount you would be "off" utilizing a natural cant?


----------



## Mahly

We need to start taking things a little less personally, and treat each other with respect.

For all intents and purposes, if you cant a bow that was sighted in holding it vertically, you will hit low and wide of your aiming point. More cant= farther miss.
A bow can be sighted in to hit spot on with the bow canted.


----------



## SonnyThomas

With Mahly........

I can't find it, but ran across a article of a person that cants his bow all the time. To look at his bow you'd think he has his Sure Loc sight frame mounted crooked, but when he's at full draw the sight frame is straight up and down. Says he shoots great at all distances.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> Brunson, further more,
> my proof is in the fact that there is no disputing proof to what I've posted, because it is factual. you can blow steam all you want, that doesn't change the truth. if you cannot come up with factually supported proof that what I say is wrong, .....you're just talking to hear yourself. there is factual evidence to what I say, ......it is not my responsibility to disprove or prove it, I am not the one disputing it.


I believe enough people have tried to set you straight on this subject. Your stubbornness won't allow you to rationalize the simple mechanics involved.


----------



## tonygoz

Perfection of form and execution is rare in all sports. Individuals somehow compensate using talents (or quirks) unique to them. Kinda believe that's half the fun of watching these events, shaking up the good ole tried and true and maybe, just maybe, learning something new in the process. Ha-ha, the empirical method is all fine and dandy, but lots and lots of variables in archery that make a muddle out of even the most well thought out equations.


----------



## ron w

Mahy,....
as long as the "sighted in" distance is what's being shot at. the cant that is typically seen as a "normal cant in one's hold", isn't as severe as a cant that is held for cross winds, either,..... that does have a affect on the amount of displacement . the reason a sight is "leveled in" on the first axis, is so that the bubble can still be trusted, if you have a natural cant in your hold.

again, all you guys are simply doing, is using omissions to try and dispute an issue you evidently know nothing about.
and as far as an arrow's trajectory not being a "parabola" , as some of you "archery geniuses" claim, .... why is that a pin sights pins, are spaced increasingly farther apart horizontally, as the yardage setting gets longer, why aren't they all simply set the same distance apart horizontally ?. if the trajectory was a simple arced curve.....a part of a circle,...they could all be spaced evenly for similar increments of distance. because a radius, has the same shape on either side of it's center distance.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> Mahy,....
> as long as the "sighted in" distance is what's being shot at. the cant that is typically seen as a "normal cant in one's hold", isn't as severe as a cant that is held for cross winds, either,..... that does have a affect on the amount of displacement . the reason a sight is "leveled in" on the first axis, is so that the bubble can still be trusted, if you have a natural cant in your hold.
> 
> again, all you guys are simply doing, is using omissions to try and dispute an issue you evidently know nothing about.
> and as far as an arrow's trajectory not being a "parabola" , as some of you "archery geniuses" claim, .... why is that a pin sights pins, are spaced increasingly farther apart horizontally, as the yardage setting gets longer, why aren't they all simply set the same distance apart horizontally ?. if the trajectory was a simple arced curve.....a part of a circle,...they could all be spaced evenly for similar increments of distance. because a radius, has the same shape on either side of it's center distance.


I don’t recall anyone questioning the parabolic curve in trajectory. I’m pretty sure everyone agrees that is true. The only claim I have made is that with zero wind, with a sight frame perpendicular to gravitational force, there will not be any deviation in horizontal point of impact as you progress through various distances. Using this same set up and canting the bow will cause the arrow to leave the bow at an angle, causing the point of impact to move in the direction the top of the bow is leaning. It will progressively shift that direction as the sight is adjusted for further elevation. It will continue on the same horizontal path after reaching the apex of the parabolic curve. It will not curve back to the opposite side or aiming point, as you have described with the protractor analogy. 

If you set up the bow with a natural cant, and have your sight frame plumb to the Earth, it will work the same. Just like the pictures posted above.


----------



## nestly

I have partially modeled a bow, arrow, and trajectory 3D and I'm not seeing a viable solution when using a significantly canted bow with a plumb 1st and 2nd axis moveable sight. When using a peep sight, and a "right cant", there seems to be no alternative other than to have the the arrow starting to the left of the vertical sight plane (the peep is in the string, which is "above" the arrow, which is canted the same amount as the bow). The arrow starts to the left, and travels left to right in relation to the sight plane to reach the target which lies on the line of sight. That seems to work fine for one distance, but is no good for longer or shorter distances because shorter distances will impact "left" and "right" of the line of sight. If there's a flaw in my logic or model... I'm all ears.


----------



## ron w

it's simple geometry, when the bow is canted, and the arrow's trajectory only crosses the line of sight at two points in it's trajectory because it's a curved line, parabolic or not....(it really doesn't matter, for this application).... one point being the initial crossing due to the arrow being lofted and the other point, being the POI. it is the only two times, in it's flight, the arrow and the line of sight intersect,...all other times the arrow is not intersecting with the line of sight, so it cannot have the correct POI, neither in elevation, or windage, in accordance to the intended POI at any distance. all other points along the arrows trajectory, do not intersect with the line of sight, in both windage and elevation. 
when the bow is canted, in comparison to the line of sight, which is exactly dead straight,.... the trajectory produced, is a curve in two dimensions, both elevation and windage,....when the bow is not canted, ...held fully vertical,.... the trajectory produced in parallel to the line of sight vertically, but not in elevation.
my GOD people, it's just simple 9th grade geometry !.


----------



## ron w

there is a post in here where someone illustrated the [email protected] curve of trajectory and claimed the maximum height of a trajectory is at the mid-point of the distance shot. in a parabolic trajectory, the maximum height of trajectory, cannot,....i repeat,.....CANNOT.....be at the mid-point of the distance shot. 
again, just simple 9th grade geometry.


----------



## nestly

Feels like I was just scolded  but I can't quite figure out if we're in substantial agreement, or not?


----------



## Padgett

Being a strong 3d guy the whole peep swinging off to the side as you cant the bow is really bothering me, I am able to aim directly at a 12 ring from 2 to 50 yards and I simply don't have left and right issues at all. I go weeks at a time without dropping a 8 because I missed left or right aiming at asa scoring rings so i know my bow is set up really good. 

BUT

As I get better at shooting I am beginning to notice something, "MY ARROW HITTING BEHIND MY PIN". This is something new to me and something that I have only really experienced in the last year or so where my arrow hits straight behind my pin where I was aiming at a variety of distances, not a little left or a little right but dead on perfect behind my pin. In the beginning it was cool and then it became more of a reality and some times it vanished. When I look back on when it vanished I am not sure it wasn't when I was messing around with my cant, I know it wasn't a big difference and in fact I won a couple local shoots this late winter with that cant but my bow arrows were not quite hitting behind the pin. 

I don't like to cant much when I do set my bow up with a natural cant, I usually do it with the bow canted to the left a little because I am left handed and it just feels nice right there. Like I said though I am not sure that the few times in the last year when I did have those stretches where my arrows just freaking hit behind the pin it was when I had the bow set perfectly vertical with the first axis. 

Crap, now I have to go convince myself again. You guys suck making me go out and check this stuff.


----------



## Mahly

I think we are seeing that in theory, yes, the bow will be off at different distances with a cant. And No, it's not enough to worry about if your set up right.


----------



## Padgett

My problem is that I am a certain level shooter for a good chunk of time and every once in a while I have a above average week or month where I am a totally better shooter. I have been improving steadily over the last few years and usually a peak in my shooting ability is a look at what my future holds and within a few months that level of shooting becomes reality and then I move on to the next level. 

With this subject is that I may have been just in a peak where my shooting execution was the reason why I was "HITTING BEHIND THE PIN". That is why I don't like to just throw things down the toilet and move on without taking a closer look.


----------



## cbrunson

nestly said:


> I have partially modeled a bow, arrow, and trajectory 3D and I'm not seeing a viable solution when using a significantly canted bow with a plumb 1st and 2nd axis moveable sight. When using a peep sight, and a "right cant", there seems to be no alternative other than to have the the arrow starting to the left of the vertical sight plane (the peep is in the string, which is "above" the arrow, which is canted the same amount as the bow). The arrow starts to the left, and travels left to right in relation to the sight plane to reach the target which lies on the line of sight. That seems to work fine for one distance, but is no good for longer or shorter distances because shorter distances will impact "left" and "right" of the line of sight. If there's a flaw in my logic or model... I'm all ears.


Wow! Great model!

Apparently you passed 9th grade geometry. Good work.


----------



## ron w

totally supports what I've contended all along. when the bow is canted, it is only on in relation to the line of sight at two points of the arrows parabolic trajectory. if the arrows POI is different than the sight's setting, the arrow's POI will deviate from the intended POI in both the vertical and the horizontal planes, at all points other than the first intersection of the line of sight and trajectory and the arrow's intended POI according to the sight's setting
when canted, as in a naturally held cant even after leveling the first axis of the sight, so that the bubble reads true level, the arrows trajectory will only intersect the line of sight at two points, instead of traveling parallel to the line of sight in the vertical plane. which will only produce deviation of POI in one plane....vertical (arrows high or low), but "on" left and right,..if the sight setting and the intended POI are different.
so a canted hold produces a trajectory that deviates from the line of sight in both horizontal and vertical planes, where a true, un-canted hold, will only produce deviation in one plane, regardless of whether the sight is level in the first axis or not and the more severe the cant, the more severe the deviation, as the trajectory rotates around the line of sight as the amount of cant is changed and/or the shot is longer.
it's not magic,...... it's just plane 'ole 9th grade geometry.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> totally supports what I've contended all along. when the bow is canted, it is only on in relation to the line of sight at two points of the arrows parabolic trajectory. if the arrows POI is different than the sight's setting, the arrow's POI will deviate from the intended POI in both the vertical and the horizontal planes, at all points other than the first intersection of the line of sight and trajectory and the arrow's intended POI according to the sight's setting
> when canted, as in a naturally held cant even after leveling the first axis of the sight, so that the bubble reads true level, the arrows trajectory will only intersect the line of sight at two points, instead of traveling parallel to the line of sight in the vertical plane. which will only produce deviation of POI in one plane....vertical (arrows high or low), but "on" left and right,..if the sight setting and the intended POI are different.
> so a canted hold produces a trajectory that deviates from the line of sight in both horizontal and vertical planes, where a true, un-canted hold, will only produce deviation in one plane, regardless of whether the sight is level in the first axis or not.
> it's not magic,...... it's just plane 'ole 9th grade geometry.


It will not intersect the line of site a second time. It will continue off in the direction the bow is canted. Unless the wind is blowing and you bubbled correctly. Then your protractor analogy works.


----------



## ron w

the arrow doesn't bend it's trajectory with out being blown off as a cross wind will do. with no outside interference, such as wind. the arrow will always cross the line of sight twice. once a few yards out of the bow as the arrow is lofted up to reach it's intended POI and once, which should be the actual POI. if distance shot and distance sighted for is not the same, the arrow will either cross the line of sight the second time and impact the target low and opposite the direction of cant, or impact the target before it crosses the line of sight the second time and impact high and in the same direction of cant. 
exactly the same as a bullet would. 
the reason arrows are spun in flight, is so that they stay on trajectory and in the same plane of trajectory that is established by the presence of the bow being either canted or held vertically. 
if this is not true, there would be no reason for those target archers who cant their bows to cant them into the wind.
futher,.... if this was not true, it could not be accepted knowledge, (and we have all agreed on this) that a natural cant, is just as accurate as vertical hold, at the one distance the sight is set for. If, when canted, the arrow continues off on some other path, how does it get back to the bulls eye ?.


----------



## nestly

cbrunson said:


> It will not intersect the line of site a second time. It will continue off in the direction the bow is canted. Unless the wind is blowing and you bubbled correctly.....


I agree with this. With either a canted bow or a un-canted bow, the arrow begins below the line of sight and cross above the line of site on it's way to the apex, and then falls back down through the line of sight as a result of gravity. The sight pin (usually) corresponds to the 2nd intersection point, but may also indexed for short shots while the arrow is still rising.

If the arrow starts on either side of the line of sight, as would be the case with a canted bow, the arrow can only cross the vertical line of site once (unless there's an external force that changes it's direction, such as wind) Ideally, the arrow should start on the vertical plane and stay on the vertical plane ie vertical bow, vertical 1st axis, vertical 2nd axis.


----------



## ron w

nestly, how does that account for the fact that a canted hold, will still hit it's mark. the peep and pin are still in alignment with the target and that is the line of sight, regardless of a cant or not and the arrow does not "bend" it's trajectory.


----------



## ron w

I gotta give up, ...you guys think what ever you want, I know the truth.....you win , or should I say,..... "once again, the AT mentality" wins ?......and you wonder why none of the pros come here anymore.


----------



## nestly

ron w said:


> nestly, how does that account for the fact that a canted hold, will still hit it's mark. the peep and pin are still in alignment with the target and that is the line of sight, regardless of a cant or not and the arrow does not "bend" it's trajectory.


With a canted hold, the arrow either starts to the left or the right of the line of sight depending on which way the bow is canted. When the arrow is shot, depending on the location of the pin, the arrow will either be angled toward the line of sight, away from the line of sight, or be parallel with the line of sight. If angled toward the line of sight, the arrow will eventually cross the line of sight, but once it intersects the line of sight, it just keeps going in the same direction, getting farther and farther away from the line of sight.


----------



## Padgett

The one thing in all these posts that was absent from my thoughts was the peep. Then once I saw the peep move off center from the arrow I remembered why I debated with Tim and the other owner at hamskea back a few years ago. It was the peep moving off center that always bothered me. 

I just went and watched all the little videos on the hamskea website and finally came to the part where he mentions that he likes a little cant on his bow and sets it up that way. I have been following this instruction for a few years but I am totally questioning it right now, Crap.


----------



## cbrunson

nestly said:


> With a canted hold, the arrow either starts to the left or the right of the line of sight depending on which way the bow is canted. When the arrow is shot, depending on the location of the pin, the arrow will either be angled toward the line of sight, away from the line of sight, or be parallel with the line of sight. If angled toward the line of sight, the arrow will eventually cross the line of sight, but once it intersects the line of sight, it just keeps going in the same direction, getting farther and farther away from the line of sight.


and that's precisely how "bubbling" works. Wind drift will push the arrow back in the direction of the target. Judging how much to cant the bow, is a question of wind speed and experience with using the method.


----------



## Padgett

I think that what allowed me to accept it was that I could justify to myself that the arrow flight wasn't affected by the cant compared to a vertical bow but in the last day once I started visualizing the peep moving off center from the arrow everything fell apart and a the sight and the peep must be on that vertical plane or you are screwed.

You could totally shoot with a canted bow if the peep had a little extension so that it was on the side of the string back on the vertical plane, then you could totally shoot with that canted setup at any distance.


----------



## cbrunson

Padgett said:


> I think that what allowed me to accept it was that I could justify to myself that the arrow flight wasn't affected by the cant compared to a vertical bow but in the last day once I started visualizing the peep moving off center from the arrow everything fell apart and a the sight and the peep must be on that vertical plane or you are screwed.
> 
> You could totally shoot with a canted bow if the peep had a little extension so that it was on the side of the string back on the vertical plane, then you could totally shoot with that canted setup at any distance.


You actually would compensate by adjusting the windage on your sight to be in line with the arrow shaft and the peep.


----------



## Padgett

For me my entire argument came from three points, the knock and the rest and the sight and I could make all of them be on the same vertical plane and convince myself that it was working but the one thing I wasn't considering was the peep. For some reason I was grouping it with the sight because I was thinking about it but not as its own contributor. All four of them have got to be on that vertical plane. 

To me this is how I will present this from now on once I go over it in my head and nail it down, but right now it is feeling like a solid way to present it.

I'm excited, I love learning something new and no matter how I get there once I am there it is a good thing.


----------



## nestly

So I just reduced the cant in my model from 15 degrees to 2 degrees, and that only puts the arrow 1/8" to the left of the peep/sight plane compared to 7/8" at 15 degree cant. Now if I also move the arrow rest 1/8" to the left of "centershot" the arrow will actually now be traveling on plane that's parallel with the sight plane, just 1/8" left of it. 

Theoretically, if a bow ends up tuning with the rest farther from the riser than the recommended "centershot" measurement, canting the bow will actually improve the parallelism of the arrow path and the sight plane. Next time I'm tuning, I'm going to put the theory to test.


----------



## cbrunson

Padgett said:


> For me my entire argument came from three points, the knock and the rest and the sight and I could make all of them be on the same vertical plane and convince myself that it was working but the one thing I wasn't considering was the peep. For some reason I was grouping it with the sight because I was thinking about it but not as its own contributor. All four of them have got to be on that vertical plane.
> 
> To me this is how I will present this from now on once I go over it in my head and nail it down, but right now it is feeling like a solid way to present it.
> 
> I'm excited, I love learning something new and no matter how I get there once I am there it is a good thing.


Yes, and with the rest being below the line of sight, when you cant the bow, keeping the peep, pin, and target lined up, the rest moves away from the direction of the cant, but because the arrow is pointing slightly upward, it shoots at an angle in the direction of the cant rather than the direction the rest moves.

If the cant is small enough, there should be enough windage adjustment on the sight to bring it back into vertical alignment.


----------



## cbrunson

nestly said:


> So I just reduced the cant in my model from 15 degrees to 2 degrees, and that only puts the arrow 1/8" to the left of the peep/sight plane compared to 7/8" at 15 degree cant. Now if I also move the arrow rest 1/8" to the left of "centershot" the arrow will actually now be traveling on plane that's parallel with the sight plane, just 1/8" left of it.
> 
> Theoretically, if a bow ends up tuning with the rest farther from the riser than the recommended "centershot" measurement, canting the bow will actually improve the parallelism of the arrow path and the sight plane. Next time I'm tuning, I'm going to put the theory to test.


That's basically just trueing up your 2nd axis adjustment on your sight. You will discover that it works very well.

It's not uncommon when setting up a bow for long distance to encounter left or right grouping at further distances. Normally it's just tiny clicks on the windage knob, but when you move back to 20 and now they hit the opposite side of center, it is because the 2nd axis is off slightly and causing the misalignment that is being discussed here.


----------



## ron w

when the bow s canted or bubbled, the arrow doesn't stay "in parallel" with the path it left the bow on, or the line of sight, because the arrows takes a lofted trajectory, that trajectory is a parabolic shape in it's path of flight. a constant curve, if you insist on calling it that. and because the plane of this trajectory is tilted, as in the bow being canted, or bubbled (which are the same thing in this application) it's profile, as viewed form directly above has the same shape, to lesser extent, depending on the amount of cant, as it's profile as viewed from directly to the side.....ie. that of a parabola. if it didn't the arrow would never intersect the line of sight twice, which it has to, in order have a POI as intended at the center of the target shot at. that second intersection with the line of sight , IS the intended POI. there is " involved in the arrow's path of it's trajectory, the "parallelism" is in the plane of the arrows trajectory. the line that is defined by the starting and ending points of the arrows flight and the point that is defined by the arrows trajectory at it's maximum height of trajectory.


----------



## nestly

I'm not sure if we're on the same page or not. As the bow expels the arrow, it does so in a straight line, it transfers no "curve", parabolic or otherwise, to arrow or the arrows path. Once the arrow is off the string, the arrow travels in a straight line unless acted upon by another force. Barring wind, the only significant forces that will act upon the arrow are gravity and drag. Drag will not affect the direction of the arrow, not vertically, and not horizontally. Gravity only acts in the vertical direction. If an arrow is headed "left" as it comes out of the bow, it travels in a straight plane to the "left" until it hits something. Ditto for an arrow that starts out of the bow headed to the right. If viewed directly from above, there will be no noticeable curve in the arrow path, whether the bow was canted or not.


----------



## ron w

the arrows trajectory is a parabola, caused by the loss of speed and pull of gravity as the spends it's energy moving through the air. this parabola is in one single plane, the plane that is established by the presence of cant or the absence of cant of the bow itself. when that parabola is canted, it is seen as an arch in both the vertical and horizontal planes.. when it is not canted, it is seen only as an arch in the vertical plane. 
again simply 9th grade geometry.


----------



## ron w

further, from the instant an arrow leaves the bow, it is loosing altitude and velocity, it has no other option but to travel in a downward arch, as it looses more velocity, the farther it gets from the bow, gravity has more time to pull it down, so the arch that it makes as it's "trajectory" is a parabola, that of having more downward curve at the end of it's flight than at the beginning of it's flight. 
as for post #162,....
if that were the case, what is the affect or purpose of canting your bow, into the wind ?. you cant into the wind, because the arrow then uses it's trajectory to fly into the wind, producing less wind drift, by using the energy imparted by the bow to send the arrow through the wing. if the arrow would have no curve when canted, there would be no benefit to canting into the wind.
really, I have to give this up, it is AT hopeless.


----------



## nestly

ron w said:


> the plane that is established by the presence of cant or the absence of cant of the bow itself. when that parabola is canted, it is seen as an arch in both the vertical and horizontal planes.. when it is not canted, it is seen only as an arch in the vertical plane.
> again simply 9th grade geometry.


An arrow shot from a bow does not bend or curve in the horizontal plane, whether canted or not. What you've suggested is simply not factual.

With regard to the wind, "canting" is an alternative to holding off the target. Either way, you're directing the arrow into the wind and letting the wind push it back.


----------



## cbrunson

ron w said:


> you cant into the wind, because the arrow then uses it's trajectory to fly into the wind, producing less wind drift, by using the energy imparted by the bow to send the arrow through the wing. if the arrow would have no curve when canted, there would be no benefit to canting into the wind.
> really, I have to give this up, it is AT hopeless.


Holy crap! That is probably the funniest thing I've seen from you. Priceless!


----------



## bowfisher

cbrunson said:


> Holy crap! That is probably the funniest thing I've seen from you. Priceless!


[emoji106]


----------



## Sasquech

You guys kill me I never laughed so hard in my life. My wife thought I was having a fit!


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, reading all this, cant needs viewed as to point of impact and kept separate from using canting into the wind. All the theories go out the window when put to the real test, shooting. Want to really know how cant works, go the Traditional forum. Some of those boys use cant more than any person with a compound bow.

As youth I shot a recurve...more like lived with a recurve, a Fred Bear 40 pound, 60". Hell, I just hauled back and shot. Both me and a friend shot every chance we got and us living on farms that was everyday (hay bales look out). Shooting squirrels and rabbits we did just that hauled back and shot and I believe we canted our bows. Target shooting, I can't remember canting the bow, but remember sighting right down the arrow. Ray Rumler owned South Side Sporting Goods and helped me get started and I was about 13 years old. You'd have to look up the next person in the NFAA. Jim Selkirk. Jim was outstanding in the Traditional class and won a few awards, one I guess is very rare to achieve. Another is Don Owens. This old feller, younger than me (62), use to stun the local compound boys. Yep, he would shoot against them from time to time. Straight scoring, 385/400 is heck of score with recurve even today. Broke his heart when compounds robbed the Traditional class in Field shooting. Later, he had a massive heart attack and really never quite came back. Saw him just this year and his present recurve tops at 37 pounds and he won his 3D class going away....

Jim Selkirk. You might find Jim in past history of drag racing. He owned and raced "Ole Will." Olds powered monster that just screamed. Jim also scared hell out of me. I had plans for a car engine in a motorcycle, still have them somewhere. This would be around the era of the Michigan Madman (late 1960s,early 1970s)(look him up, fuel inject engine in a bike). All was going fine, frame, in and out boxed transmission and tires and Jim decides we're going to stick a hemi in my bike. I declined and put all away. Some guy bought the frame, turned it into a trike and stuck my 500+ hp 409 Chevy in it. Longer story surrounds the big 409, but another owner took 3rd overall in Illinois stock car racing twice.


----------



## nuts&bolts

nestly said:


> An arrow shot from a bow does not bend or curve in the horizontal plane, whether canted or not. What you've suggested is simply not factual.
> 
> With regard to the wind, "canting" is an alternative to holding off the target. Either way, you're directing the arrow into the wind and letting the wind push it back.


Sooo many pages.
I had to think long and hard, HOW to explain why tilting the top of the bow, to the LEFT, will move the arrow point of impact to the LEFT.



THE ZERO DEGREE cant, for the 100 yard shot, results in an UPHILL launch angle for the arrow..to hit 100 yards away.
TILT the top of the bow SIDEWAYS 90 degrees LEFT, and you can easily see that this EXTREME amount of CANTING...has your formerly UPHILL arrow, now pointing to the SEVERELY LEFT.

You say NOBODY CANT's the top of the bow 90 degrees to the LEFT.

The physics for a 90 degree LEFT CANT
is the same physics for a 10 degree LEFT CANT. Just easier to visualize.


----------



## erdman41

Pretty sure people claiming that arrows and now bullets curve left to right or right to left when canted and do not just go straight left or straight right when canted is doing a fine job of upholding AT'S reputation.

Oh wait his gun was canted when he fired it.

https://youtu.be/DMroqOpIvTc


----------



## ron w

nestly said:


> An arrow shot from a bow does not bend or curve in the horizontal plane, whether canted or not. What you've suggested is simply not factual.
> 
> With regard to the wind, "canting" is an alternative to holding off the target. Either way, you're directing the arrow into the wind and letting the wind push it back.


 you better brush up on your ninth grade geometry, when a plane that is neither vertical or horizontal (as in,... "at an angle"), intersects a segment of a circle (the arrow's trajectory), the resultant line of intersection, is seen as a curve in both the horizontal and the vertical planes. the plane of trajectory of an arrow from a canted bow, is in the same plane as the plane of thrust of the bow. the arrow maintains that plane of trajectory because of the dynamics of the gyroscopic effect called "polar couple", which is the function of the interaction between the FOC of a projectile and it's polar moment, or the ends of the projectile. they work to maintain the projectile's path of travel within it's trajectory, that was establish at the point of origin.. 
the curved shape intersection thing above, is simple 9th grade geometry. at least it was for me, I don't know about anyone else, here at this "wonderfully informative site, full of experienced helpful archers.".. 
now,..... we have me making these statements, and the guy that is considered, the best "informer", "teacher", (whichever you prefer to call him), on the whole site, confirming and supporting what I am saying, (who is by the way a "real engineer", as well)...... what more do you need ?.
this 2004 all over again, and the reason all the pros abandoned this site,.....no-one learns.


----------



## cbrunson

This could truly become an epic thread. 

And yes ronw, I think a lot of people would put you and Alan into the same category.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, heck... ron doesn't post graphs and pictures  

I just had to.....


----------



## ron w

ya, unfortunately, my small mind doesn't have room to learn how to post graphs and pictures......it's too full of real knowledge.


----------



## SonnyThomas

No problem, ron. Until people go out shoot what they preach... Well, you know....


----------



## erdman41

Oldpro said:


> It seems to me that I started this discussion in 1979. Hence the invention of "The Sight Leveler"
> 
> Mike is right on the money. 3rd axis does matter and I can tell you right now that close is not good enough. In an experiment last summer I determined that a .005" shim will move your arrow 8" at 80 yards on a 14 degree angle.
> 
> I wrote an article in the mid 80s:
> 
> A Sight Leveling Concept
> How to level your sight properly
> 
> A SIGHT LEVELING CONCEPT
> By Gene Lueck
> 
> What is a bow sight? A bow sight is a piece of equipment we attach to our bow which enables us to program the drop of an arrow to hit a target at a given distance. By moving the block of your sight up or down, you can change the impact of your arrow from near to far and back again. This is what I want to talk about.
> 
> Since we are dealing with the effect of the force of gravity on the arrow, there are several factors that we must deal with in order to also control the left or right impact of the arrow.
> 
> *Due to the fact that gravity ALWAYS pulls the arrow STRAIGHT down from the time the arrow leaves the bow until it hits the target*, it is absolutely necessary to have your sight bar perfectly parallel to gravitational pull. In order to achieve this relationship it is necessary to set your level bubble with a considerable amount of accuracy. I am going to describe a method that will assure you of this type of accuracy.
> 
> Over the years people have used various methods which may or may not have worked, such as the old pillar in the basement, the doorjamb in the hallway, or the side of a tree in the front yard with a carpenters level. These methods have gotten us by over the years but have always left a little to be desired. Given the technological advancement of todays equipment and the ability of todays archers those old methods are not acceptable.
> 
> It is necessary to hold your sight in a rigid fixture, which will enable you to pivot it in a perfectly vertical arc up and down. You must remove your sight block from the sight bar before starting this procedure, or move the block to one end so you can place a torpedo level against the flat side. Adjust the fixture so the sight extension is parallel to the ground. Place a torpedo level vertically on the side of the sight bar, and loosen the two screws that attach the sight bar to the sight extension. Adjust the sight bar until the torpedo level indicates that it is vertical and tighten the screws. Re-check with the level to make sure that the bar didn't move when you tightened the screws.
> 
> At this point you can place your sight block on the sight bar or move the sight block to a point adjacent to the end of the extension and set the level bubble. All quality sights on the market today will have adjustment screws to enable you to set the level bubble. Now is when you must pivot your sight upward or downward to determine if the sight aperture screw is at right angles to your sight extension. First point the sight upward at about a 30-degree angle and see if the bubble stays centered. If it does not, you may need to adjust the third axis, you may need to slightly shim the mount that the sight screw runs through, or adjust the level bubble itself, as some apertures have this feature on them. Looking from the front of the sight, if the bubble is to the right, you must place the shim vertically under the left side of the mount and vice versa. (Left hand would be the opposite) Then point the sight horizontally again. At this point the bubble should be centered. Now point the sight downward 30 degrees and check the bubble again. Due to the fact that the vials that are used for level bubbles are not necessarily perfectly shaped, sometimes it is necessary to alternate the up and down movements and make very slight adjustments to ultimately center the bubble in all areas of the 60 degree arc. During this upward and downward check, DO NOT LOOSEN THE LEVEL ADJUSTMENT SCREWS ON YOUR SIGHT BLOCK. Except to shim the mount if necessary. Always do this with the sight bar horizontal. Once you have these screws set you should never touch them again unless you replace the sight aperture.
> 
> Your level bubble is now properly adjusted.
> 
> Now lets put the sight on the bow. Contrary to popular belief it is not necessary to align your sight bar with the string. I would ask you if you have ever seen a crossbow with the sight bar aligned with the string? Simply attach the sight mount to the bow and place the sight in it. Tighten down the sight knob and draw the bow. If the level does not feel comfortable it is totally acceptable to cant (lean) your bow. I personally cant my bow between 3 and 5 degrees to the right as I am right handed. This cant should be a point at which you are comfortable at full draw. You can determine this point by closing your eyes, drawing the bow, opening your eyes and checking the position of the level. Since we have set the level bubble in relation to the sight bar, you must not loosen the screws on the sight block but in stead, loosen the screws that attach the sight bar to the sight extension. Once these screws are loosened, you must experiment by canting the bar one way or the other and tightening the screws until the bubble is in the middle and you are comfortable at full draw.
> 
> Now we have the sight attached to our bow and are able to aim up or down hill and maintain a level bubble.
> 
> The final item that we must cover is the relationship of the sight bar to the arrow. It is imperative that the level bubble vial is at right angles (perpendicular) to the path of the arrow. In order to achieve this, it may be necessary to place shim material beneath your sight extension mount, either in back or front of the screws vertically to square the arrow with the front of the sight bar. It is necessary to have a small carpenters square to check this. Place an arrow on the string and across the arrow rest with the bow held vertically. Place the carpenters square across the front of the sight bar and align it with the arrow shaft. If this alignment indicates that the arrow is not traveling at right angles to the front of your sight bar, you will need to properly shim your sight mount block to achieve this.
> 
> Now we have a sight attached to our bow, we are comfortable at full draw, and the arrow is traveling at right angles to the bubble. With this set-up you will have the ability to shoot up hill or down hill, long or short distances, and the impact of your arrow will not vary from left to right. The rest is up to you.
> 
> Good Shooting!
> 
> The following pic will show you the extreme cant you can put on your bow and shoot right down the gut. This is my bow and I have virtually no left or right at any angle up or down and I set my sight up off the bow.


Done


----------



## ron w

of course it does, that's elementary physics. what's the problem ?. 
the arrow's trajectory is maintained in whatever plane that is established at the bow, the fact that gravity only pulls vertically, simple represents that the shape of the established trajectory will be altered to some extent by gravities pull. the angle of the trajectory's plane of trajectory, is maintained by the polar couple that exists in a spinning projectile. gravity doesn't completely take over and eliminate the effects of the gyroscopic function of the polar couple, it only alters it. both forces are present and produce a resistance to each others affect on the arrows flight. 
you guys are arguing, with out actually knowing anything about which you are saying.
you keep relating to issues of how the sight s set up, the sight means nothing more than a reference to aim with in this application. the real issue s between the arrows flight and the attitude in which the bow is held in relation to the line of sight, which is not the "sight"...... not how the sight relates to the other two conditions.
I simply give up trying.......


----------



## ron w

Erdman, where do you live, I live in Central Wi. too, i'm willing to the trouble of meet you somewhere, if not too far, and draw you some pictures that illustrate what i'm trying to explain, just to end this silliness. it can all be easily illustrated with just two simple drawings, that have two lines and a target on each piece of paper. I don't know how to post them, and I don't have a printer/copier, either.


----------



## erdman41

ron w said:


> Erdman, where do you live, I live in Central Wi. too, i'm willing to the trouble of meet you somewhere, if not too far, and draw you some pictures that illustrate what i'm trying to explain, just to end this silliness. it can all be easily illustrated with just two simple drawings, that have two lines and a target on each piece of paper. I don't know how to post them, and I don't have a printer/copier, either.


No need I know how gravity works and that arrows or bullets don't shoot around corners.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Got it figured that different "language" is a determining factor in the argument....


----------



## ILOVE3D

Going to give this a try at what I believe and take it for what it cost you. If one sights in a bow perfectly vertical you have two places where the sight and the projectile cross paths. If you add cant, whatever degree you want but the more cant the more difference of poi and that also varies with the distance of the shot. With a bow, think about shooting at a target at say 3 yards, your arrow will hit using say your 60 yard pin but using your 60 yard pin at 20 yards, your arrow will hit pretty high. Now, think about your bow being sighted in vertical and adding say cant to the right, since your arrow is going to head in ONE plane only, that is starting off rising and then falling after it reaches it's apex it will though hit right of where your sight said it would. Your sight and arrow are pointing in two different planes once you add cant to the bow. Otherwise, how do you account for canting into the wind and your arrow ends up hitting where you prefer. Don't know exactly how to explain it but make fun all you want, canting into the wind does make a difference when one has their bow sighted in using a different cant.


----------



## nestly

ron w said:


> you better brush up on your ninth grade geometry, when a plane that is neither vertical or horizontal ..
> 
> [snip] non-sense... more non-sense... more non-sense [/snip]


First of all, geometry has virtually nothing to do with exterior ballistics. The flight of an arrow is physics, classical mechanics, and ballistics. An arrow in flight is not constrained to a "plane" ... not a vertical one, and not a horizontal one, and not one that anywhere in between. The arc of the arrow defines the plane, not the other way around, and the plane it defines will always be vertical. (assuming no wind, and disregarding rotational drift which while real, is too insignificant to be relevant to this discussion) If the arrow was constrained to a predefined plane, you could totally shoot around corners simply by turning the bow 90 degrees so the sight plane was horizontal... The problem is you'd end up shooting yourself in the back... LOL. That is ridiculous and frankly stupid, yet that's exactly what you're saying. It doesn't matter if the bow and/or sight plane is canted or not, if the arrow starts off going left relative to the line of sight, it keeps going left relative to the line of sight until it hits something. 

It's ironic that you're accusing others of ruining AT's reputation when you're the one that's talking stupid.


----------



## nestly

ILOVE3D said:


> Otherwise, how do you account for canting into the wind and your arrow ends up hitting where you prefer. Don't know exactly how to explain it but make fun all you want, canting into the wind does make a difference when one has their bow sighted in using a different cant.


No one (I hope) is saying that canting into the wind isn't an effective technique for shooting in the wind. An arrow being shot from a bow is angled "uphill" relative to the line of sight, When you cant the bow a little, the arrow is still headed "uphill" relative to the line of sight, and still "uphill" relative to the horizon, but it's also headed either left/or right of the target depending on which way it's canted. The more the farther the bow is canted, the less the arrow is headed "uphill" relative to the horizon, and the more it's headed left or right. If canted a full 90 degrees to the right, the arrow is still headed "uphill" relative to the line of sight, but it's no longer pointed "uphill" at all relative to the horizon, it will impact extremely right, and extremely low. Any right cant in between vertical and 90 degrees right cant with also be right and low. A "tiny" cant will be only a "tiny" bit right and a "tiny" bit low. More right cant will be more right impact and more low impact. 

Canting a bow a modest amount to the right to account for wind is substantially the same as keeping the bow level and just aiming right of the bullseye, in both cases, the arrow starts off headed right of the bullseye hopefully the archer correctly estimates how much the wind will push it back to the left. The advantage to canting is simply that the shooter can keep their near the bullseye instead of "holding off" to the left or right.


----------



## nestly

ron w said:


> .... the arrow maintains that plane of trajectory because of the dynamics of the gyroscopic effect called "polar couple", which is the function of the interaction between the FOC of a projectile and it's polar moment, or the ends of the projectile. they work to maintain the projectile's path of travel within it's trajectory, that was establish at the point of origin..
> 
> ..and the guy that is considered, the best "informer", "teacher", (whichever you prefer to call him), on the whole site, confirming and supporting what I am saying, (who is by the way a "real engineer", as well)...... .


I suggest you ask him directly if he agrees with your assertion that the arrow is constrained to the sight plane rather than you telling us what you think he did and didn't agree with.


----------



## cbrunson

nestly said:


> No one (I hope) is saying that canting into the wind isn't an effective technique for shooting in the wind. An arrow being shot from a bow is angled "uphill" relative to the line of sight, When you cant the bow a little, the arrow is still headed "uphill" relative to the line of sight, and still "uphill" relative to the horizon, but it's also headed either left/or right of the target depending on which way it's canted. The more the farther the bow is canted, the less the arrow is headed "uphill" relative to the horizon, and the more it's headed left or right. If canted a full 90 degrees to the right, the arrow is still headed "uphill" relative to the line of sight, but it's no longer pointed "uphill" at all relative to the horizon, it will impact extremely right, and extremely low. Any right cant in between vertical and 90 degrees right cant with also be right and low. A "tiny" cant will be only a "tiny" bit right and a "tiny" bit low. More right cant will be more right impact and more low impact.
> 
> Canting a bow a modest amount to the right to account for wind is substantially the same as keeping the bow level and just aiming right of the bullseye, in both cases, the arrow starts off headed right of the bullseye hopefully the archer correctly estimates how much the wind will push it back to the left. The advantage to canting is simply that the shooter can keep their near the bullseye instead of "holding off" to the left or right.


Very well stated. The only thing I would note is that the vertical change in POI is also insignificant with an effective cant. A half bubble will move the arrow 4-6" at 40-50 yards while the vertical drop will be nearly unnoticeable. (From experience, not 9th grade algebra class)


----------



## erdman41

ron w said:


> where have i ever said, "Bullets and arrows shoot around corners",.....kind of figured i'd get that kind of reply, from you....... OK then, go on thinking the silliness you want to.
> just another typical AT member, that can't be taught anything.





ron w said:


> consider as done previously, that the radiused edge of a protractor represents the trajectory of an arrow in flight.....that is as clearly a demonstrative as we can establish and a very good one, at that !. we know this shape (a constant radius) is not actua, because a projectile's trajectory is a parabola,....l but for demonstrative purposes, any curved line will work.
> now, as before, with the protractor, sitting on it's straight edge, if you cant the protractor, it demonstrates what happens to the arrow's trajectory as it is canted. if you look along the protractor's length, you will see that the radiused edge of the protractor, which represents an arrow's trajectory, forms a curving line in respect to your line of sight, which is dead straight at all times.
> so.....*
> the arrow's trajectory, does "magically" (as you put it) curve, as it's plane of trajectory is canted.*
> my God, I showed this thread in it's entirety to my son and told him to read through it and let me know what you think, who doesn't hunt, doesn't even shoot a bow or a gun, and he understood what i'm trying to explain, completely.





ron w said:


> if you cant the bow, say 15 degrees, the plane of thrust is now deviated from true vertical by 15 degrees, and the arrow's plane of trajectory reflects that same deviation . the line that defines the plane of trajectory,... the line that intersects the three points you referred to above, will be in the same plane as the plane of thrust of the bow. consider that as the arrow sits on the rest, it does not sit on just one point of contact, it's sits on two points and those two points are at right angles to the line of thrust, thus one point of contact is higher than the other, because the bow is canted. this originates the arrow's plane of trajectory to be 90 degrees to the plane of thrust of the bow, thus, the plane of trajectory is canted the same amount as the bow is canted. the plane of thrust and the plane of trajectory are always parallel.





ron w said:


> like this /..........exactly,.... using a protractor was a good demonstrative analogy., that is exactly what I have contended from day 1


The curved edge of a protractor sitting like this / the arrow moves to the right as it goes up and then magically decides to start going back to the left on the way back down is ridiculous. The protractor is always perpendicular to gravity. When you cant a rifle all you did is spin the barrel which moves the sight. The bullets trajectory path is still going to go from the 12 o'clock position to the 6 o'clock position of the rifle barrel. It doesn't change to 1 o'clock and 7 o'clock.

If what you say is true that movie clip I posted wasted a lot of money on CGI when all they need to do was hold the gun on an angle. Arrows don't care what angle the string is the same as a bullet doesn't care which way a barrel is spun on a receiver.


----------



## erdman41

nestly said:


> First of all, geometry has virtually nothing to do with exterior ballistics. The flight of an arrow is physics, classical mechanics, and ballistics. An arrow in flight is not constrained to a "plane" ... not a vertical one, and not a horizontal one, and not one that anywhere in between. The arc of the arrow defines the plane, not the other way around, and the plane it defines will always be vertical. (assuming no wind, and disregarding rotational drift which while real, is too insignificant to be relevant to this discussion) If the arrow was constrained to a predefined plane, you could totally shoot around corners simply by turning the bow 90 degrees so the sight plane was horizontal... The problem is you'd end up shooting yourself in the back... LOL. That is ridiculous and frankly stupid, yet that's exactly what you're saying. It doesn't matter if the bow and/or sight plane is canted or not, if the arrow starts off going left relative to the line of sight, it keeps going left relative to the line of sight until it hits something.
> 
> It's ironic that you're accusing others of ruining AT's reputation when you're the one that's talking stupid.


Bingo


----------



## ron w

hmmm, let me see,...if a plane is defined by the arc of an arrows trajectory, how is that "plane" not associated with geometry ?......geometry is all about planes and angles and lines and arcs and all those silly things, isn't it ?.. physics, has nothing to do with geometry.....?...wow that's a real statement !.. ballistics is the study of projectiles in flight, it includes and cannot exist with our physics and geometry.....wow, I can't believe I have to even say this stuff !.. wait a minute,..... now I see what you mean,....a physicist knows nothing about geometry and never uses it,...right ? if the an arc of trajectory is defined by it's ballistic trajectory and that is defined as a plane, , how can a "plane" not be associated with ballistics ?.
you can twist it around to fit your useless argument all you want, all it shows is how much you really don't understand.
hmmm, I wonder, what do think an arrow has helical or offset, in it fletching for,....if you are going to say ..." for drag"..., there are many other ways to create dag, other than with helical or offset fletching.
I think you should really go back to the basics and read up a little on arrows and how they work, in general, if you google "arrow", you'll probably get quite a bit of reading material !.
you realize you're in an "archery forum", don't you ?.


----------



## ron w

hmmm, let me see,...if a plane is defined by the arc of an arrows trajectory, how is that "plane" not associated with geometry ?......geometry is all about planes and angles and lines and arcs and all those silly things, isn't it ?.. physics, has nothing to do with geometry.....?...wow that's a real statement !.. ballistics is the study of projectiles in flight, it includes and cannot exist with our physics and geometry.....wow, I can't believe I have to even say this stuff !.. wait a minute,..... now I see what you mean,....a physicist knows nothing about geometry and never uses it,...right ? if the an arc of trajectory is defined by it's ballistic trajectory and that is defined as a plane, , how can a "plane" not be associated with ballistics ?.
you can twist it around to fit your useless argument all you want, all it shows is how much you really don't understand.


----------



## ron w

sorry for the double post, the first one is actually the post that applies.


----------



## Mahly

Time for a time out.
Once I feel everyone has had a chance to review this linked thread, I will re-open the current thread.

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2200744


----------



## Mahly

SonnyThomas said:


> Got it figured that different "language" is a determining factor in the argument....


You are more right than most people would admit.


----------



## nuts&bolts

If we are taking a 100 yard shot, the arrow launch angle is definitely uphill.



The 1/4-inch thick sheet of plywood, is a PRETEND riser. So, when we sight in with a vertical riser, we hit all of our targets in the bullseye.



So, with the "riser" vertical, I am lined up on the red planter (orchid). Watch what happens, when I "cant" the riser, the top of the riser to the RIGHT.



Cant a riser, the TOP of the riser to the RIGHT, your new arrow flight course is decidedly NORTH EAST, presuming the planter (orchid) is due NORTH. CANT the top of the bow to the RIGHT, the arrow is definitely pointing off to the RIGHT.


----------



## [email protected]

Canting the Sight and the Bow

Recurve and longbow shooters cant their bows…30-45 degrees right or left..depending archers "handedness". Recurve and longbow shooters do a pretty good job of hitting the target.

Some compound shooters (Tim G and Gene L) set their bows up with cant. Maybe not as dramatic as recurve and longbow shooters, but it works for them. These folks generally shoot pretty good.

So how is it possible these folks can even hit the target? Because the arrow goes were it is aimed. The arrow is launched relative to the sighting system. 

Think of the sighting system for bows (or rifles) as points on a ray. The ray starting point for bows is the grip low point. Also on the ray is the arrow rest. Above the arrow rest are the points of the sight system..the scope aiming reference points as it slides up/down the sight frame..the pins on a multi-pin sight..the imaginary aim points for the longbow guy. The correct aiming reference points are in a perfect vertical line..because that's how gravity works in a trajectory. 

Assuming you have set the sight's 2nd axis properly, all of the sight reference points fall on the ray. The sight frame is a line that is perpendicular to the sight system ray. If the sight frame is not perfectly perpendicular..IE "level"..the sight reference points will not be on the ray.

The cant of the bow is like a line that intersects the sight system ray's start point. When you cant the bow, the attached sight system cants relative to the bow. The string is in line with the riser. The peep stays in the same position relative to the riser and string.

By canting the bow, the the sight system reference points moves out of perfect vertical alignment..rotating around the sight system ray start point..the grip low point.

Cant the bow left, sight reference points move left..arrow rest moves left..arrow is being aimed to the left (and actually a bit lower)..arrow is launched pointing to the left..arrow hits left.


----------



## Sasquech

The answer to the gillingham question is in yardage if your max yardage is 50 and you are centered at say 30 then you have slight deviation on either side of 30 it is not huge If you tune for it but it exists. In 3d and a great shooter you can began mentally adjusting for what your mind gets used to I shoot slight left at close shots so my auto aim adjusts for that we aren't talking half the 12 ring on most targets. It is when you are trying for quarter size groups at 65 that these things make a difference. Or when you go out to 90 meters or 110 like redding. For your average under 45 yard 3d shot this is within the shooter error but if you carefully plot exact impact point of all your arrows then over 2 to 3 thousand arrows you will began to see the pattern. Thanks n&b exactly illustrated the point now everyone is on the same page!!!!!!!!!


----------



## nestly

nuts&bolts said:


> Cant a riser, the TOP of the riser to the RIGHT, your new arrow flight course is decidedly NORTH EAST, presuming the planter (orchid) is due NORTH. CANT the top of the bow to the RIGHT, the arrow is definitely pointing off to the RIGHT.


That's a great job simplifying and illustrating why cant affects the left/right direction the arrow is pointed. I hope you don't mind, but I copied your methodology and added a curved arrow path directly influenced by gravity.


----------



## nuts&bolts

nestly said:


> That's a great job simplifying and illustrating why cant affects the left/right direction the arrow is pointed. I hope you don't mind, but I copied your methodology and added a curved arrow path directly influenced by gravity.


Well done. PERFECT.


----------



## Sasquech

You two are awesome done and doner. Padget I think we have two winners. Finally complete explanation. Now nasty I would like to take your rig and narrate it with wind and a bubble to teach young people how to use bubbling to compensate for wind by very slightly canting into the wind . This is awesome guys . Thanks Mahly for both the time out and for these guys concise illustrations of the issue at hand. Every Joan should have one of nests rigs with a level bubble on top for this lesson. fantastic job guys. 
thank you


----------



## SonnyThomas

Still, I think how used terms, "language" and mixing things had a lot to do with this thread running on.....


----------



## Sasquech

Yup it is my fault I did not do what neatly did to illustrate my point. I was trying to figure out how to illustrate it. Sorry for the folks that got beat up in this thread I think the outcome was worth it


----------



## SonnyThomas

So Tim Gillingham was noted. Look at the limbs. Just how much cant does he have? You know, if he had cant the limbs wouldn't the limbs show more off than somewhat equal? Okay, you can see the off side limbs in each picture.


----------



## erdman41

https://youtu.be/UJRwvwsSh3Y

Here he is.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Heard of what the video gives. For whatever reason tube videos won't show on my Dell computer, never has. I always get error message. I've tried everything. Windows 7 and 10 and back to Windows 7. Yep, went through the "Learn More." Maybe due to being on Dial Up out here in the sticks as there are no Drivers available for phone modems. For Microsoft, only Vista remains phone modem friendly...


----------



## EPLC

[email protected] said:


> Canting the Sight and the Bow
> 
> Recurve and longbow shooters cant their bows…30-45 degrees right or left..depending archers "handedness". Recurve and longbow shooters do a pretty good job of hitting the target.
> 
> Some compound shooters (Tim G and Gene L) set their bows up with cant. Maybe not as dramatic as recurve and longbow shooters, but it works for them. These folks generally shoot pretty good.
> 
> So how is it possible these folks can even hit the target? Because the arrow goes were it is aimed. The arrow is launched relative to the sighting system.
> 
> Think of the sighting system for bows (or rifles) as points on a ray. The ray starting point for bows is the grip low point. Also on the ray is the arrow rest. Above the arrow rest are the points of the sight system..the scope aiming reference points as it slides up/down the sight frame..the pins on a multi-pin sight..the imaginary aim points for the longbow guy. The correct aiming reference points are in a perfect vertical line..because that's how gravity works in a trajectory.
> 
> Assuming you have set the sight's 2nd axis properly, all of the sight reference points fall on the ray. The sight frame is a line that is perpendicular to the sight system ray. If the sight frame is not perfectly perpendicular..IE "level"..the sight reference points will not be on the ray.
> 
> The cant of the bow is like a line that intersects the sight system ray's start point. When you cant the bow, the attached sight system cants relative to the bow. The string is in line with the riser. The peep stays in the same position relative to the riser and string.
> 
> By canting the bow, the the sight system reference points moves out of perfect vertical alignment..rotating around the sight system ray start point..the grip low point.
> 
> Cant the bow left, sight reference points move left..arrow rest moves left..arrow is being aimed to the left (and actually a bit lower)..arrow is launched pointing to the left..arrow hits left.


And the winner is... :thumbs_up The stick bow analogy is a great one.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Here in Illinois we have prevailing westerly winds. Okay, wind coming out of the west the vast majority of the time. Outdoor target is to be set so the archers shoot North. So if windy, what practice takes place and if the Outdoor event allows X number of practice shots to start the event, then a archer just might get the grasp of how to aim however he or she chooses, cant into the wind or hold into wind. One of the clubs I shoot at holds the IAA Outdoor State Championship and they have flags a bit above the target.


----------



## EPLC

Btw, I do not agree that the examples in posts #194 and #197 display correct arrow flight based on cant. Cant does not change the arrow flight, it changes sight alignment. If the sighted bow is canted to the left the arrow will miss right, cant to the right the arrow will miss left. This is simply a sight alignment issue, not a trajectory issue. The arrow comes out of the bow straight and gravity pulls it straight down regardless of cant or no cant. The trajectory does not curve to the left or right following the cant. If this were true you would be able to shoot around things by canting the bow. I shoot with a natural cant and my sight has been set to plum at full draw. It works because the sight is plum and the trajectory is also plum.

Also, there are problems with the angle chosen for the examples, a more accurate example would have the pivot at or near the arrow as the peep and sight are not parallel. The arrow and sight bar are closer to being parallel. Even there the arrow will generally have nock high which would create a slightly opposite angle to the examples given in posts 194 & 197.


----------



## Sasquech

The example in post 198 is fact if you don't agree with it you don't understand archery. It is a perfect illustration of the effect. That is why you can't into the wind the arrow moves in the direction of the cant. Common elpc that is a given for any one that shoots out doors.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Again, something of a misunderstanding. Cant into the wind and arrow will be "curved" by the wind. I think this where things aren't kept separate....


----------



## Sasquech

I understand your illustration but it is incorrect as the flight of the arrow leaving a bow is up then down if you tilt the bow that rise is turned into left right in the direction of the cant . 

Your third picture is incorrect as the peep cannot be adjusted to be over the arrow. Middle pic is good but does not account for the arrow rising off the blade and being pushed right. 

Your middle pic is likely true with a drop away. Picture 3 I would like to know how you adjusted the peep back over the arrow since the bow is canted the right hand pic is incorrect.


----------



## EPLC

Sasquech said:


> The example in post 198 is fact if you don't agree with it you don't understand archery. It is a perfect illustration of the effect. That is why you can't into the wind the arrow moves in the direction of the cant. Common elpc that is a given for any one that shoots out doors.


Actually there are several problems with the example(s). First, the peep and sight are not the pivotal point as a bow cant does not pivot along this plane. But the biggest problems are point of impact and trajectory depictions. And Sonny, wind is a whole nuther topic.

I believe this is a more accurate depiction of the effect of cant and how canting the bow can be fixed with a simple sight adjustment to assure the sight is plum regardless of cant angle.


----------



## Sasquech

Please review and respond to post 210 elpc the peep will never be above the arrow on a canted setup. Always off to the side in direction of the cant.


----------



## KRONIIK

SonnyThomas said:


> Still, I think how used terms, "language" and mixing things had a lot to do with this thread running on.....


I just stumbled into this thread and read about the last three pages. 

You are absolutely correct; most of the discord is simple misunderstanding. 
One example I'll toss out there is the comparison between a recurve shooter canting his bow 45 degrees and being able to hit, so why shouldn't a modern Compound shooter be able to do the same?
The answer lies in the fact that the trad guy cants his bow around the axis of his drawn shaft, which is in effect also his line of sight.
But the compound guy cants *his *bow around an imaginary line between his peep and his sight pin.
That line is neither parallel nor coaxial to his drawn shaft-therefore the effects of similar cant are going to be very different than that of the trad guy.

Yet that sort of thing gets ignored and the beat goes on.


----------



## Sasquech

Kroniik you are correct trad canting there is no peep or sight different game all together

Also gillingham cants very little almost unnoticable


----------



## SonnyThomas

Sasquech said:


> Kroniik you are correct trad canting there is no peep or sight different game all together
> 
> Also gillingham cants very little almost unnoticable


Did you see the two pic I posted of Tim? ....#202


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Actually there are several problems with the example(s). First, the peep and sight are not the pivotal point as a bow cant does not pivot along this plane. But the biggest problems are point of impact and trajectory depictions. And Sonny, wind is a whole nuther topic.
> 
> I believe this is a more accurate depiction of the effect of cant and how canting the bow can be fixed with a simple sight adjustment to assure the sight is plum regardless of cant angle.


It actually angles away rather than parallel as shown in your figure 2. The video nestly made is about as clear as it can get.


----------



## nuts&bolts

EPLC said:


> Actually there are several problems with the example(s). First, the peep and sight are not the pivotal point as a bow cant does not pivot along this plane. But the biggest problems are point of impact and trajectory depictions. And Sonny, wind is a whole nuther topic.
> 
> I believe this is a more accurate depiction of the effect of cant and how canting the bow can be fixed with a simple sight adjustment to assure the sight is plum regardless of cant angle.


If an arrow is pointed uphill, when shooting a 100 yard target on level ground...100 yard target is located due north of the shooter
and then you cant the bow 90 degrees...what direction is the arrow now pointed? Answer, if you canted the bow to your right, 
the arrow is now pointed NORTH EAST, and no amount of windage will correct for this. Well, IF you had extreme windage available for your sight,
you COULD correct for the windage at 100 yards ONLY...but, then, you would need a NEW windage correction for 80 yards, and another WINDAGE correction for 60 yards, etc.


----------



## SonnyThomas

No wind. No matter what, the arrow rises to the pin. If just 20 yards most pin settings are around 3 3/8" above the top of the arrow shaft. Now think side view, line of sight straight, arrow must rise to intersect the pin for 20 yards. Bow canted you can still align the sights to see the wanted point of impact, but the arrow must still rise. So the arrow has to rise and rises in the direction of cant. So the arrow comes out of the bow angularly to the line of sight. Alan correctly notes you must have a new windage set for each distance. 

I noted to ask in the Traditional Forum. Most that cant their bows, no sights, are looking right down the arrow shaft. Why I used chalk was to make the point show up better. Look down the shaft, the white point helps find center and just shoot.


----------



## EPLC

nuts&bolts said:


> If an arrow is pointed uphill, when shooting a 100 yard target on level ground...100 yard target is located due north of the shooter
> and then you cant the bow 90 degrees...what direction is the arrow now pointed? Answer, if you canted the bow to your right,
> the arrow is now pointed NORTH EAST, and no amount of windage will correct for this. Well, IF you had extreme windage available for your sight,
> you COULD correct for the windage at 100 yards ONLY...but, then, you would need a NEW windage correction for 80 yards, and another WINDAGE correction for 60 yards, etc.


I shot some at short range this evening, canting the bow in both directions as well as plum. I want to continue testing this testing in my shooting machine to remove any human error. Personally, I'm having trouble accepting that this can't be done as I shoot with a huge cant, have adjusted/shimmed my sight to account for it and it seems to work just fine. My left/right issues have improved and I shoot field archery almost every day. Hey, if I'm wrong I'll eat crow but I'm not seeing it.


----------



## Sasquech

Ok here is the test it is simple shoot 2 arrows at 60 yards center bubble then shoot at the same spot with full left bubble two arrows. Then two arrows full right bubble. Results should be obvious. 

Note you have to be grouping inside a coffee cup at 60 to see the difference or the whole discussion is moot as your margin of error is larger than the effect. Each group of two arrows must land win an inch or 2 of each other or you don't see it at all.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> First, the peep and sight are not the pivotal point as a bow cant does not pivot along this plane.


Actually, if you're using a peep and a sight pin, they are the "pivotal points" about which the bow is rotated when cant is introduced.. Imagine a straight line between your eye and the target. Whether the bow is vertical, or canted to one side or the other, you still try to keep the peep and the sight pin on that line between your eye and the target... right? The arrow, which is below the line of sight, swings to the left or right of the line of sight as the bow is canted. 



EPLC said:


> wind is a whole nuther topic


Yes it is. 

There's enough confusion and mis-understanding about what happens when a bow is canted without introduce additional variables. Once the issue of canting is understood, then it's becomes easier to understand how one affects the other.


----------



## ron w

you guys keep on trying to explain it, sooner or later you get what i'm talking about.


----------



## cbrunson

Sasquech said:


> Note you have to be grouping inside a coffee cup at 60 to see the difference or the whole discussion is moot as your margin of error is larger than the effect. Each group of two arrows must land win an inch or 2 of each other or you don't see it at all.


Good point. A half bubble or even a full bubble at 20 yards is not going to show the effects very well. If you can not shoot 3" groups at 60, you also may not see the difference.


----------



## EPLC

fanio said:


> The curve of the arrow is not affected by the angle of the bow at launch. If there is no wind, the arrow goes EXACTLY straight up, reaches an apex, and comes EXACTLY straight down. This is true whether your bow is 90deg (perfectly vertical) or at 60deg or 45deg or 10 deg (almost held horizontally). This is due to Newton's First Law of Motion: ("Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.") - if the only force is gravity - which works perfectly straight down - then the arrow cannot "curve" to the left/right (unless you are applying an external force with your fletches - and the fletching will have the same effect for a perfectly vertical bow).
> 
> The reason you shoot left/right when you cant the bow, is because you are changing the position of the dot. A cant to the left (top limb) will always move the dot to the left, so it is like you moved your sight's windage to "chase the arrow". It's that simple.





nestly said:


> I really only read the first post, but once the arrow is off the string, it no longer follows the (canted) plane defined by the peep and arrow shaft, it travels in plane that's defined by gravity (ie vertical plane), with allowance for external factors such as wind drift and/or drift cause by the arrow rotation.


These statements reflect what I believe and tried to show in my charts. I'll do some testing today, but at short range for now. My shooter is quite capable of shooting same hole, same arrow, groups at 15 yards. I should see a difference if there is any. If the test is inconclusive I'll go outside at some point this week and retest. I do see the example logic but I want to see it in real time. The question really is: Does the arrow follow the direction of the cant or not?


----------



## EPLC

Please correct anything that I may have misunderstood here.


----------



## SonnyThomas

No different than Alan put forth.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> Please correct anything that I may have misunderstood here.


Since you look through the peep to the sight and target, keeping them aligned, it should be obvious that you pivot around that axis. The direction the arrow points changes, not the line of sight.


----------



## fanio

SonnyThomas said:


> No different than Alan put forth.


Sonny, are you and Alan and Ronw suggesting the arrow will land within the circle on that diagram? I.e that it will move back from right (at its apex) to left?


----------



## nuts&bolts

EPLC said:


> Please correct anything that I may have misunderstood here.


If you "pivot at the arrow", when you cant your bow sideways (top of bow moves sideways),
do you also CANT your head? If you do not can't your head, when you cant your bow...

then, the pivot is the peep sight. So, this means, if you sight your bow at the practice range, with the riser DEAD vertical (yellow line)
and then, a week later, when shooting a field archery course, and you are bubbling into a cross wind (canting the riser into the wind)..say 10 degrees, say 20 degrees, say 30 degrees,
the ground is level, as you cant your bow more and more and more, cuz the cross wind is gusting stronger and stronger...

do you cant your head MORE as you cant the riser more? Cuz, if the ARROW truly is the pivot, then, as you cant the riser MORE, then, the PEEP sight has to...the PEEP SIGHT HAS TO move
more and more SIDEWAYS.

If the peep is the pivot point, and your HEAD is stationary, as you cant the riser MORE and MORE and MORE
then, the bow arm/bow hand is what moves sideways, as you cant the riser more and more and more. Try it, at the practice range,
and see if your HEAD moves SIDEWAYS as you cant the riser....at full draw. Try a little cant angle, try a medium amount of cant angle, then try a large cant angle,
and see if you have to shift your head SIDEWAYS as you try different cant angles, for your riser.


----------



## Padgett

Wonderful thread, it is like many here on archery talk and will help some people and not help others, for me it has helped and it is something that should compliment my shooing instead of hinder it.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> The only way this can work is with the pivotal point being the arrow, not the peep to sight angle... This theory maintains that the arrow does not follow the direction of the cant.


I think we're on the same page? Maybe just thinking about it differently. 
You can definitely hit the bullseye just as easily with a canted bow as you can with a non-canted bow as long as position of the arrow does not change relative to the target. But that's not how we typically use the sights on a bow. If you're going to use your sights, the eye, peep, front pin, and target must all be aligned. When going from vertical to canted, the arrow, which is below the line-of-sight is either going to move left or right depending on the cant direction. So assuming a right cant, the arrow is going to start left of the line-of-sight, cross the vertical sight plane just once, then continue getting farther away from the line-of-sight. Assuming the 2nd axis is level, all your pin settings are going to be on that vertical sight plane, so the arrow will only have a correct left/right impact at one distance.

I want to be clear not to overstate or understate how big of an issue that is, If you cant the bow 15-20 degrees right, your arrow will be about 1" to the left of vertical line of sight. If you sight your canted bow in to have a perfect left-right impact at 100 yards, you won't have any left-right impact at 100 yards. At 0 yards, you'll be 1" left (because we already established the arrow is 1" left of the peep sight) 20 yards will be 8/10th inch left, 40 yards = 6/10th inch left, 50 yards = 5/10th inch left. 4/10th and 2/10th respectively for 60 and 80 yards. Not much at all in reality so what's all the fuss about? Well, how many archers do you know that would be happy being consistently 8/10" left at 20 yards? A more realistic scenario is that the archer wants the 20 pin to be "dead-on" so they sight in their canted bow in for 20 yards. The arrow will still start out 1" left at 0 yards, cross the vertical line of sight at 20 yards and be "dead-on". At 40 yards, it's now on the other side of the vertical sight plane by 1" and 2 inches at 60 yards, 3" at 80, and 4 inches at 100 yards. Again, not too good if you want to score well everywhere between 20 and 100. 

15-20 degrees is a HUGE cant for a compound bow with sights, reduce that to just 2 or 3 degrees and you can do the math yourself but you're going to have to be awfully good in order for it to have a significant affect on your scores.


----------



## Padgett

In the last year I have been on a quest to tighten up my bow and learn how to be dead on instead of scrambling to sight in the day before a big shoot, i have learned how to really get a peep tied in so it doesn't move and have a string built where the center serving isn't slightly moving up the string and I am now seeing how to set up a sight to the bow so that my windage isn't lying to me.

Thanks.


----------



## nestly

SonnyThomas said:


> No different than Alan put forth.


You should not presume that Allan agrees with the image you just posted, and now that you've "spoken for him", I would suspect he'll comment as he sees appropriate.


----------



## SonnyThomas

fanio said:


> Sonny, are you and Alan and Ronw suggesting the arrow will land within the circle on that diagram? I.e that it will move back from right (at its apex) to left?


Bow canted, only if you're sighted in for it. You could very well have dead X accuracy at 20 yards. Okay, the farther out you shoot the farther the arrow goes in the direction of the bow cant. Bow canted and sighted in say for the noted 20 yards. Change the sight (height only) for 75 yards and you could possibly miss the target altogether....There is no curve. The arrow flies straight, just angularly to the sights because the bow is canted... Heck, turn the bow perfectly upside down and shoot the arrow will travel to the point of intersect, gravity in effect, and the arrow will continue down into the dirt....

Can you have X amount of cant and remain pin point accurate for ranges out to 50 yards? Maybe, but the cant is so miniscule we can't see it and definitely hard to measure. I noted Tim Gillingham's pictures. If real cant were present you couldn't see the off limb in one of the two pictures. 

As Brunson pointed out, the pivot point is the line of sight as in my drawing. Prove that it isn't. The arrow is well over 3" down from the pin set to 20 yards. Tell me that the arrow doesn't have to climb to reach the pin to hit the wanted point of impact.....

Sighted bow and sighted rifle. Instead beating yourself to death, take a .22 with scope sighted in for any reasonable distance, 35 to 50 yards. Now, lay the rifle on it's side and aim dead center of the target. Where's the bullet going to hit? Turn my drawing so the point of intersect is up. 

ron, you're right. No sense in continuing....


----------



## SonnyThomas

nestly said:


> You should not presume that Allan agrees with the image you just posted, and now that you've "spoken for him", I would suspect he'll comment as he sees appropriate.


And why wouldn't I presume?


----------



## ron w

if,... when canted.....even a minor cant such as when natural. if the arrow takes off in the direction of the cant,...which it most certainly does..... and which is not parallel to the line of sight. how does it get back to intersecting with the line of sight at the target's distance ?.
pretty simple,..... if you know.
actually,....arrows do go around corners.......


----------



## [email protected]

EPLC said:


> Please correct anything that I may have misunderstood here.


EPLC, Like the graphics you posted, but I think the pivot point of the system has to be the grip low point. If the pivot point were the arrow centerline, canting left would shift impact to the right. You would simply be rotating the sight reference points on an arc around the arrow centerline. Re-aligning the canted reference points to the target would move the arrow impact right. 



With a trad shooter shooting off the shelf, the arrow center line is still above the grip; not as much as with a compound, but still higher.

The effect of canting the bow and sight system to the left has the same effect as moving the arrow rest to the left. 

The line of sight..ie front sight and peep..cannot be the axis of rotation because canting the bow and sight system left around line of sight would then move the arrow rest to the right. Moving the rest to the right moves arrow impact to the right.

The peep is a semi-fixed part of the bow and sight system. Sight, riser, string, and peep all move in concert and rotate around, and relative to, the pivot point. Cant left, peep moves left. The amount of peep movement is much less than the front sight movement, as it is closer to the origin of the line of sight. You adjust for the peep moving left by canting your head slightly. Unless you have a totally floating anchor point, canting your head left moves your jaw to the right. Since the jaw contact of your anchor moves right, the nock end of the arrow is moved to the right. 

Using stick figures to explain..


----------



## ron w

the system, as whole, pivots around the point of contact at the grip, but that has nothing to do with the association between the plane of trajectory and the line of sight. the plane of trajectory pivots around the line of sight. all the grip does is establish the degree of cant of the entire system.


----------



## Mahly

As stated, the bow pivots mainly around the line of sight. The peep, your pin, and the target are still lined up for your eye.
When plumb, the arrow invariably is set to shoot "uphill" so the arrow can intersect that line of sight. It must shoot uphill, as the sights are about the arrow.
So, as shown in several diagrams, the arrow moves up to the sight.
If canted, say top limb right, the sights are now to the right of the arrow and above(or easier was to look at it, the arrow moves left, away from the sights...rotating around the sights).
Nothing mechanically changed, so the arrow still is pointed to intersect with the sights. Being that the arrow is left of the sights, it will START left, but will cross the sight plane and hit right.


----------



## nestly

SonnyThomas said:


> And why wouldn't I presume?


The cropped image you just posted is substantially the same as the photograph, however the original image you posted, and the one I said you should not presume is reflective of his position shows the arrows "path" which is distinctly and conveniently absent the influence of gravity.

In direct opposition to your original image, I offer this, which while not dimensionally accurate, does accurately demonstrate how canting affects the "path" of an arrow as well as it's point of impact. 
Just to be clear, an arrow that's sitting static on a bow, whether drawn or at brace has no "path", it only has a direction. The "path" is the course it progresses along while in motion.


----------



## Mahly

nestly said:


> The cropped image you just posted is substantially the same as the photograph, however the original image you posted, and the one I said you should not presume is reflective of his position shows the arrows "path" which is distinctly and conveniently absent the influence of gravity.
> 
> In direct opposition to your original image, I offer this, which while not dimensionally accurate, does accurately demonstrate how canting affects the "path" of an arrow as well as it's point of impact.
> Just to be clear, an arrow that's sitting static on a bow, whether drawn or at brace has no "path", it only has a direction. The "path" is the course it progresses along while in motion.


Exactly.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> Since you look through the peep to the sight and target, keeping them aligned, it should be obvious that you pivot around that axis. The direction the arrow points changes, not the line of sight.


I understand the logic as presented; what I'm not seeing is how offsetting the sight to allow for a canted bow works if the peep to sight is the pivot and the arrow follows the cant. And I'm sure it works because I use that method to offset my very visible left cant.


----------



## ron w

this phenomena, cannot be illustrated by drawing straight lines...... because the arrow only travels in a straight line in one plane,....that plane is the "plane of trajectory", which is pivoted around the line of sight and is also parallel with the line of sight, regardless of whether any degree of cant exists, or not.
although the arrow travels in a straight line and on a plane vertically, it does not when that plane is canted.....it then travels on an arc of trajectory that is now manipulated to include both the horizontal and the vertical planes. if it didn't, the arrow would never return to intersect with the line of sight at the target's distance, given that distance and the aimed sight setting is the same.


----------



## Mahly

Your just adjusting the sight to match. If you hit low left, you would move your pin down and left to match.
The problem is that you can only be set up 100% perfect for one distance.
Where if held perfectly vertical, the same pin would work for say 3 yards and 40 yards, now the arrow only intersects your sight at 40 yards. at 3 you would be low and right (assuming a top left cant).
You can set up to be dead on at a certain yardage, (most would set up for something 1/2 way between their min and max shot) and deal with a slight right impact at shorter yardages, and a slight left impact at longer ones. The amount of how slight may be insignificant.
One could reduce this even further by canting the sight as it is mounted on the bow FURTHER than perfectly plumb (Bow leans left, sight leans right of vertical) but you adjust your scope to read perfectly level.

For this, I just make sure my stabs have the bow sit plumb in the first place LOL!


----------



## ron w

EPLC said:


> I understand the logic as presented; what I'm not seeing is how offsetting the sight to allow for a canted bow works if the peep to sight is the pivot and the arrow follows the cant. And I'm sure it works because I use that method to offset my very visible left cant.



i'll bet, that if you look at the alignment between peep, rest and sight, with the bow at brace, those three points will not be in the same plane at all yardage settings on the sight's vertical travel.


----------



## nestly

Mahly, Any chance of re-ordering the posts so no-one interprets your post as a rebuttal of mine..... or better yet, remove both sonny's post and my last response to sonny about moveable sights and anchor point shift as neither are germane to this topic.


----------



## Padgett

There has been awesome information in this thread and it is each individual persons choice to use a open mind and actually read and see the truth, for me I finally had a switch flip in my brain that allowed me to see it. 

This thread isn't here to convince everyone to switch their beliefs and this isn't going to happen, human nature won't allow it. But even if a few people get something out of it the thread was worth its time. I am one person that learned something and had to change my point of view and am glad to be apart of it.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> what I'm not seeing is how offsetting the sight to allow for a canted bow works if the peep to sight is the pivot and the arrow follows the cant. And I'm sure it works because I use that method to offset my very visible left cant.


It doesn't "work", that's the point, if the arrow is pointed left or right as it leaves the bow, it will only have precise left-right alignment with your sights once. Every other distance will be some degree of left or right, depending on whether it's before or after the arrow crossed the vertical sight plane. 

However, a modest cant still "works" well enough for virtually all archers because we're not machines, we're made up of bone and soft tissue connected with ligaments and muscles and our ability to perceive very small measurements, especially at distance is limited. Thread is moving fast, but I tried to give some reference distances for a 15-20 degree cant in post #231 in case you missed it.


----------



## ILOVE3D

Just a thought to throw into the mix, when you set up your bow sight with a natural cant, I would hope you would also at that point need to* set your 2nd and 3rd axis* that would also help bring the arrow back in line with your offset or canted sight and guessing the arrow would be at minimum off to one side even at point blank, perhaps 1/2 an inch although I would think it would not be in the same plane, the arrow vs the line of sight.


----------



## ron w

correct, it is by the fact that the arrow travels straight in only one plane, that that we are able to level the sight and still hit the center with a natural cant...and that condition exists,..... only if the sighted distance and the shot distance are the same. if your bow is canted, either naturally or not, it will only be "on" in both planes at one single distance given the sight is set for that single distance and the shot is that distance.
the difference is that, when held vertically, the shot is "on" one plane all the time and only off in elevation regardless of shot distance and sighted distance .
consequently, if you shoot with a natural cant, you better be on in yardage estimation.


----------



## TNMAN

If the peep is ruling the roost as much as this thread seems to conclude, then should we be leveling first axis/site bar to a plumb string rather than the riser? Or is it really ok to shoot to a small cant produced by using the riser? 

All long as an archer is not having to fight the bow and is shooting better shots when set up to a small natural cant, imho, he is very likely to score better....and that is the only thing that counts.

edit: Starting to think "chanting" was correct all along.


----------



## Padgett

I am to the point where I am excited to get to the bow shop and put my bow in the draw board and bring it to full draw with the d-loop twisted just like it is when I have my release on my face at anchor and see if the peep is perfectly vertical to the knock and if there is a difference in from before drawing the bow to full draw.

Why? Because I know from grouping my arrows to the same hole with the hooter shooter that any little change as I shoot of the angle of the release changes the poi by at least a inch or even more by rotating the release so I am just curious what I find.


----------



## nestly

TNMAN said:


> If the peep is ruling the roost as much as this thread seems to conclude, then should we be leveling first axis/site bar to a plumb string rather than the riser? Or is it really ok to shoot to a small cant produced by using the riser?
> 
> All long as an archer is not having to fight the bow and is shooting better shots when set up to a small natural cant, imho, he is very likely to score better....and that is the only thing that counts.
> 
> edit: Starting to think "chanting" was correct all along.


Well, it's not the string or string angle per-se, it's the fact that the peep is located at least a few inches above the arrow. Canting the bow moves the rear sight out of vertical alignment with the arrow. Canting does have a significant affect on impact, but probably less than someone without any practical experience might be lead to believe by only reading this thread. Of course someone without any practical experience might be lead to believe a lot of things that aren't true if they believe some of what's been suggested here.


----------



## Padgett

It is the warning signs that a guy like me ignores, for example I can shoot soft ball sized groups out to 95 yards on a normal day so why wouldn't I set my windage back there because doing it back there is far enough to really dial in compared to 20 yards where it is easy to hit the 12 ring. 

Second warning sign is something that only happens once a weekend on tough courses or sometimes it takes a few weeks, I totally miss the yardage by 5 or 6 yards and when I do this the arrow never hits dead on above the 12 ring. It always hits way above or way below depending on how I misjudged and it hits a few inches off to one side. 

It is irritating to look back and see the little justifications that a person has in their setup, when I walk onto a course I am 100% confident in my bow and my training and I think you have to be that way or you end up second guessing things. I can't wait to get my arm healed up so I can shoot and put this stuff to work for me instead of against me.

Why? Because my daughter and I were moving my mig welder last night and I think I severed my bicep from my elbow, I see a surgeon Wednesday and find out if it is really bad or not. I think it is.


----------



## EPLC

Preliminary testing complete. What I found was consistent but inconclusive. Inconclusive in that a significant left cant did produce a left of center shot consistently but a significant right cant did not. In fact the right cant drilled the same hole as the plumb shot. I repeated the test over several iterations and the results did not change. 

Here's the setup.


----------



## EPLC

Here's the Plumb shot. Took a few to get the bow and system sighted in but once there it repeated well.


----------



## EPLC

Significant left cant. I'm curious as to why this shot went higher than the other test shots? But... it is what it is.


----------



## EPLC

Significant right cant. This shot had the same POI as the Plumb shots. It was consistent for several arrows. All testing was done at 14 yards.


----------



## Mahly

I think your gonna need to step it back to 40+ to see noticeable changes.


----------



## ron w

and this shows,......what ?


----------



## [email protected]

TNMAN said:


> then should we be leveling first axis/site bar to a plumb string rather than the riser?


Yes. The sight frame should be plumb..level..to the trajectory.



TNMAN said:


> Or is it really ok to shoot to a small cant produced by using the riser?


Yes. If you shoot with the riser at an angle to the sight but the sight is plumb to the trajectory, everything is good. 

Your peep will change position very slightly in a vertical plane to keep the scope centered. The peep does not necessarily follow the string angle when the front sight position is changed. The cant of the bow is only relative to the shot if it causes the sight frame to cant from plumb.




Padgett said:


> I know from grouping my arrows to the same hole with the hooter shooter that any little change as I shoot of the angle of the release changes the poi by at least a inch or even more by rotating the release so I am just curious what I find.


It would be interesting to put a laser alignment tool (above the bow) on the arrow to see how it changes relative to the scope and peep alignment when the bow is canted in the Hooter Shooter. Bummer about your bicep.


----------



## ron w

higher,....when you cant the vow, it points the arrow up slightly and in the direction of cant . that is why canting works in the wind. you are driving the arrow into the wind, so there is some energy used "bucking the wind", so to speak. it just so happens that the geometry of canting somewhat compensates for the arrow being pointed into the wind, that's why canting works to shoot in a cross wind. 
believe it or not, it's not just some crazy idea that some guy discovered one day, while fooling around in his back yard.


----------



## SonnyThomas

nestly said:


> The cropped image you just posted is substantially the same as the photograph, however the original image you posted, and the one I said you should not presume is reflective of his position shows the arrows "path" which is distinctly and conveniently absent the influence of gravity.
> 
> In direct opposition to your original image, I offer this, which while not dimensionally accurate, does accurately demonstrate how canting affects the "path" of an arrow as well as it's point of impact.
> Just to be clear, an arrow that's sitting static on a bow, whether drawn or at brace has no "path", it only has a direction. The "path" is the course it progresses along while in motion.


Wow! A whole bunch of words and nothing changed that of Alan's real life boards (riser), tube (sight), wood rod (arrow) and no gravity in effect and my drawing showing a side view of what he has and no gravity in effect. Granted the "arrow path" is angled dramatically, but to give the fact that the arrow and line of sight must intersect at some point, hopefully in the X ring.


----------



## [email protected]

EPLC said:


> Significant left cant. I'm curious as to why this shot went higher than the other test shots? But... it is what it is.


Related to rest type maybe? Drop-away VS blade?


----------



## ron w

the laser will obviously point in the direction of the cant if aligned with the arrow's path, unless the laser is aligned on the line of sight. that's why I said, in the above post, you can't use straight lines to illustrate the arrows path, ....they don't fly straight in both planes. however, a laser's light does, point dead straight in both plains so it will show it's "laser poi" as being off in the direction of cant and of course, the further the laser's pointed POI, the further the distance the poi will be off target.......because it is a dead straight line in space instead of the parabolic curve an arrow produces.


----------



## [email protected]

ron w said:


> the laser will obviously point in the direction of the cant if aligned with the arrow's path.


Actually, what I was thinking is if the laser were aligned on the arrow with the sight level, that canting left would show the arrow pointing to the left relative to the laser.


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> Significant left cant. I'm curious as to why this shot went higher than the other test shots? But... it is what it is.


EPLC, it could be the atmospheric conditions and gravitational forces at your geological location during a fluctuation of Earth's magnetic field. That's I give for a excuse of a poor hit 3D target


----------



## nuts&bolts

Mahly said:


> I think your gonna need to step it back to 40+ to see noticeable changes.


90 meters/100 yards. The effects will be obvious.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Is someone saying the arrow doesn't go in the direction of the cant? Has someone said gravity doesn't effect the arrow?


----------



## SonnyThomas

nuts&bolts said:


> 90 meters/100 yards. The effects will be obvious.


:thumbs_up


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> and this shows,......what ?


Just cuz you haven't figured out how to post pictures yet, don't be a smarty pants...


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> I think your gonna need to step it back to 40+ to see noticeable changes.





nuts&bolts said:


> 90 meters/100 yards. The effects will be obvious.


Certainly longer distances will increase the effect but I believe this can be done at short range as well. My setup is quite accurate and repeatable. 



[email protected] said:


> Related to rest type maybe? Drop-away VS blade?


I'm using a QAD drop-away which I don't think would effect POI. I'm thinking more that my setup may have some issues. The cant, both left and right I used was significant. The fact that a right cant did absolutely nothing to POI is interesting where right cant did. Btw, this is a left handed bow.


----------



## ron w

it will point to direction of the can't relative to the line of sight, which the intended trajectory revolves around when canting. as the arrow sits on the bow, it is in the beginning of it's intended trajectory, as the attitude that it sits on the bow and leaves, is what establishes it's trajectory. some may say the sight alignment establishes a bow's trajectory, but in reality, now think about this,....in reality, we establish the sight's alignment, to coincide with the trajectory the pow produces.


----------



## nestly

SonnyThomas said:


> Wow! A whole bunch of words and nothing changed that of Alan's real life boards (riser), tube (sight), wood rod (arrow) and no gravity in effect and my drawing showing a side view of what he has and no gravity in effect. Granted the "arrow path" is angled dramatically, but to give the fact that the arrow and line of sight must intersect at some point....


Did you see his response when built a physical model based on his methodology and added an additional component to demonstrate the affect of gravity?


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> Certainly longer distances will increase the effect but I believe this can be done at short range as well. My setup is quite accurate and repeatable.


While I would have expected more clear results in both directions, I also agree 14yds is too short. Just out of curiosity, are your sights set for 14yds, or something else, because in order for the test to be accurate, the arrow must be impacting the target at the same elevation as the peep and sight are aimed. 

Re: "Significant cant". Do you have a way to actually measure how many degrees that is? I just did a quick check on my bow and 1/2 a bubble is about 3/4 of a degree. I put a full 1 degree cant into my 3D CAD model and based on my my setup, it shows I'd be impacting a bit less than 1/2" left or right at 20 yards, which isn't that far off one of your results. I can run the numbers for 40 and 100yards if you can shoot that far to compare my simulated results to your field results. There will of course be some variations based on bow speed, arrow weight, the vertical distance between the peep and the arrow, etc, but it would probably be in the ball park if the FPS are somewhat close.


----------



## ron w

a full one degree of cant,.....one degree will hardly be noticeable and can hardly be considered "cant' for anything but purely mathematical data.


----------



## nuts&bolts

ron w said:


> a full one degree of cant,.....one degree will hardly be noticeable and can hardly be considered "cant' for anything but purely mathematical data.


AGREED. Here is what seven degrees of cant looks like.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> While I would have expected more clear results in both directions, I also agree 14yds is too short. Just out of curiosity, are your sights set for 14yds, or something else, because in order for the test to be accurate, the arrow must be impacting the target at the same elevation as the peep and sight are aimed.
> 
> Re: "Significant cant". Do you have a way to actually measure how many degrees that is? I just did a quick check on my bow and 1/2 a bubble is about 3/4 of a degree. I put a full 1 degree cant into my 3D CAD model and based on my my setup, it shows I'd be impacting a bit less than 1/2" left or right at 20 yards, which isn't that far off one of your results. I can run the numbers for 40 and 100yards if you can shoot that far to compare my simulated results to your field results. There will of course be some variations based on bow speed, arrow weight, the vertical distance between the peep and the arrow, etc, but it would probably be in the ball park if the FPS are somewhat close.


Yes, my sight was set at 14 yards. I didn't measure the angle of cant but I can rig something up to do so. If I had to guess I would say 3-5 degrees, like I said significant. Interesting also that almost all of my misses are right misses. Almost never have a left miss at any distance. This is definitely worth playing with.



nuts&bolts said:


> AGREED. Here is what seven degrees of cant looks like.


Ok, so why does this work if the arrow follows the cant? Seems like a contradiction as some here do not believe this works. Adding the red line makes it even more confusion as the arrow and sight don't even come close to lining up?


----------



## SonnyThomas

nestly said:


> Did you see his response when built a physical model based on his methodology and added an additional component to demonstrate the affect of gravity?


Yep, read his response. So adding a curve is big deal? No one is disputing gravity/trajectory.

I've posted this more than a couple of times.
Dell Computer, Windows 7, on Dial Up. Windows 7 has no Drivers for Dial Up. Out in the country, no DSL available, satellite way too expensive.
Here's what I get. Done the "Learn More" more times than I want and to no avail.


----------



## nuts&bolts

EPLC said:


> Yes, my sight was set at 14 yards. I didn't measure the angle of cant but I can rig something up to do so. If I had to guess I would say 3-5 degrees, like I said significant. Interesting also that almost all of my misses are right misses. Almost never have a left miss at any distance. This is definitely worth playing with.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, so why does this work if the arrow follows the cant? Seems like a contradiction as some here do not believe this works. Adding the red line makes it even more confusion as the arrow and sight don't even come close to lining up?


Easiest way to understand this. If you are shooting 100 yards, the arrow HAS to point uphill, like this.



His arrow is OBVIOUSLY pointing uphill. Long range shot. Might be 70 meters or longer.

Two shooters. Both shooting the same long range target. Might be 70 meters. Arrows are DEFINITELY uphill, the launch angle is UPHILL,
not level.

Another example. Long range shot. ARROW launch angle is uphill.


----------



## nuts&bolts

EPLC said:


> Yes, my sight was set at 14 yards. I didn't measure the angle of cant but I can rig something up to do so. If I had to guess I would say 3-5 degrees, like I said significant. Interesting also that almost all of my misses are right misses. Almost never have a left miss at any distance. This is definitely worth playing with.
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, so why does this work if the arrow follows the cant? Seems like a contradiction as some here do not believe this works. Adding the red line makes it even more confusion as the arrow and sight don't even come close to lining up?


Now, anyone who shoots field archery, knows this works.

So, let's explain why the arrow follows the direction of the cant. Right handed shooter. TILT the top of the bow to the shooter's right,
and assuming ZERO cross wind, the arrow is going to MISS RIGHT.

BUT WHY?

Easy peasy.



Arrow is OBVIOUSLY pointed UPHILL. LET's assume that she has a ZERO degree cant. TOP of bow and BOTTOM of bow are at ZERO degrees of rotation, PLUMB to the earth.

I've said this before.

Let's also assume she CANTS her bow 90 degrees to the right.
If the target is due NORTH....when she cants her bow a MASSIVE amount, 90 DEGREES to her RIGHT,
and the RISER is now HORIZONTAL...the TOP and BOTTOM limb pockets are FLAT as a table top...

the arrow is now pointed NORTH EAST. When you CANT a bow 90 degrees, at a 90 meter target,
when the RISER is vertical, the arrow is pointed UPHILL,
but,
when you CANT a riser 90 degrees, the ARROW is no longer pointed UPHILL, but pointed NORTH EAST.



This is why, the MORE you cant a bow to your RIGHT, the MORE the arrow point of impact moves to the RIGHT.

THIS effect is MAGNIFIED for folks with a LONG face, where the peep is vertically farther away from the arrow.
This effect is MAGNIFIED for folks with a lower anchor, say the handle release is anchored along the edge of the jawbone.

With a VERTICAL riser, the peep is directly above the arrow tube/shaft. So, if you are a field archer, and you normally shoot a vertical riser, PLUMB to the EARTH...and your bow is tuned, all your shots go in the bullseye, from 10 yards to 80 yards (max distance on a field archery course).

Standard practice, if you encounter a cross wind, to BUBBLE into the wind, which means to TILT the top of the bow into the cross wind.
If you have a cross wind coming from your right, blowing your arrows off course to the LEFT of the bullseye, common practice to tilt the top of your bow, to the RIGHT...1/2 bubble, 1/4 bubble, 3/4 bubble to DRIVE your arrows to shift the point of impact, MORE to the RIGHT...cuz the cross wind is blowing your arrows off course, to the left.



BLUE sheet of paper is the riser. BLUE riser is PLUMB to the earth.



BLUE sheet of paper, the BLUE riser is no longer PLUMB to the earth. Seven degrees away from vertical is a LOT of real world cant.
In my paper example, I have 85 degrees of cant. THIS is a ridiculous amount of cant.



DASHED line is the line of sight. HEAVY BLACK line is the uphill angle of the arrow. When the RISER is PLUMB to the earth, it looks like this.



BUT, if you CANT the paper riser 85 degrees, the arrow points NORTHEAST...when the target and the line of sight is still located DUE NORTH.



PAPER pic is taped to the bottom side of my kitchen hood.



The kitchen cabinet doors are PLUMB to the EARTH.
When the blue paper riser is taped to the bottom of the kitchen hood, this would be equivalent to canting a riser 90 degrees,
you can see that the BLACK dashed line is still pointing DUE NORTH at the target,
but, the SOLID BLACK line, the arrow flight direction, is now flying NORTH EAST.

So, I canted the blue paper riser, 90 degrees to the shooter's right.
So, you can see that if you cant a riser 90 degrees to the right, and the arrow is aimed for a 90 meter target (severe uphill launch angle)
then, the arrow is going to fly to the shooter's RIGHT.


----------



## nuts&bolts

Blue paper riser is canted 90 degrees to the right. Arrow nock is now MUCH closer to my kitchen wall, in relation to the BLACK dashed line of sight.
So, cuz the arrow nock moved sideways CLOSER to the kitchen wall, the arrow flight path is not parallel to the kitchen wall behind the cabinet, the arrow flight path is going to fly away from the kitchen wall.


----------



## EPLC

I found my center shot and tune was off. I hadn't really fine tuned this bow since I put the MD cams on it. I found that when I tuned the bow with the center shot centered to the riser and then yoke tuned it started to behave like the examples posted. I was only shooting it off-hand but the arrows did seem to react towards the cant, both left and right. I'll validate in the shooter sometime tomorrow if I get the chance. The pics below show my starting point and what I ended up with.


----------



## EPLC

Ok when shooting long yardage but what about short yardage when the line of sight is parallel to the arrow, or even above?


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> but what about short yardage when the line of sight is *parallel to the arrow, or even above*?


The arrow starts out below the line-of-sight so it's never going to be "parallel to the arrow, or even above".
If you're eye is above the arrow shaft by 4", then you'd be 4 inches low at 0 yards and gravity only pulls the arrow down from there, so anything over 0 yards is going to be more than 4 inches low, if arrow and line-of-sight are parallel. On my rig, the closest my arrow gets to being parallel with line-of-sight is 11 yards, where the arrow is still angled "upwards" 0.7 degrees. That's where the arc of the arrow just meets the line-of-sight, but does not cross it. 3 1/2 degrees upward relative to L.O.S for 100 yards.


----------



## Sasquech

This effect is most obvious when sited dead on at 20 yards pinwheeling x's then adjust to 60 or better yet 90 meters. But looks like we are coming back together


----------



## nestly

SonnyThomas said:


> I've posted this more than a couple of times.
> Dell Computer, Windows 7, on Dial Up. Windows 7 has no Drivers for Dial Up. Out in the country, no DSL available, satellite way too expensive.
> Here's what I get. Done the "Learn More" more times than I want and to no avail.
> 
> *An error occurred, please try again later*


So you haven't actually viewed any of the videos I've posted in this thread, or the other one? Or Levi's video about moveable sights?


----------



## SonnyThomas

I saw Levi's video before my Emachine with Vista got light by lightening. YouTube is the problem. Otherwise I can view videos and movies...just takes forever to download on Dial Up. 3 wireless companies can't get to me. I'm 220 feet down in the valley. You can stand right beside my phone and call my phone number on your cell phone and can't reach me....


----------



## SonnyThomas

You know, "IF" you have the bore of a rifle parallel to the ground and fire the rifle the bullet is in the dirt fast. It'd be the same if you shot a arrow, same height as the rifle bore, parallel to the ground the arrow would be in the dirt fast...at a shorter distance of course.


----------



## ron w

quite simply, the arrow follows and remains in the canted plane because it is a spinning projectile. it the reason we impart spin to a projectile,..... any projectile. 
spin produces a gyroscopic stability that makes any projectile remain in the attitude of flight that is established during it's launch. if the projectile didn't spin, there would be no reason for it to meet the intended point of aim with any amount of predictability.
if you think this isn't true, "because we do bare shaft our arrows", strip all the fletching off your arrows and shoot them bare shaft all the time,....see what happens.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> quite simply, the arrow follows and remains in the canted plane because it is a spinning projectile. it the reason we impart spin to a projectile,..... any projectile.
> spin produces a gyroscopic stability that makes any projectile remain in the attitude of flight that is established during it's launch. if the projectile didn't spin, there would be no reason for it to meet the intended point of aim with any amount of predictability.
> if you think this isn't true, "because we do bare shaft our arrows", strip all the fletching off your arrows and shoot them bare shaft all the time,....see what happens.


An arrow is not always a spinning projectile as in the case of straight vanes. It will fly like a dart, not a bullet.


----------



## ron w

of course there are people who choose to straight fletch their arrows, but they are, by far in the minority. it is only that the bows do a good job of launching an arrow that the arrows group decently. and I guarantee you there would be more stability in flight, if the fletching imparted spin,....that is undeniable. 
if it worked as well as your intended detraction, why isn't used more often than it is. 
maybe you could explain the dynamics of a "straight fletched" arrow in regard to stability in flight.....I guarantee you, you won't be able to because what you don't realize, is that despite the fletching that is straight, the arrow still ends up spinning.


----------



## Padgett

Archery talk is like this and learning how to read everything and dismissing the stuff that isn't going to help is the key, when I first made a few posts in this thread I was 100% confident in what i was saying and believing but it only took one little post by one person to open my eyes to something that I had been missing. I sure didn't expect to be the guy that got to learn something but am really glad that I did. 

In all reality with all our fully decked out target bows with rear stabs and long front stabs and the ability to customize the feel and hold getting the bow to sit perfectly vertical isn't a issue anymore. Before rear bars and v bars I could see where it would be very easy to justify setting up a bow with natural cant and finding positive things to justify that decision but now I really don't think it is worth the risk. i have enjoyed my accuracy over the last few years but am looking forward to possibly tightening up my windage with the things i have learned.


----------



## [email protected]

So I been struggling with the "revolving around the line of sight" concept…

If it were line of sight related, you should be able to mount a sight directly underneath the projectile and get a similar result with the models being used. 

The trouble with using line of sight under the trajectory is it doesn't work as well in this scenario. The trajectory doesn't cross the line of sight until the impact range. You'd still have a triangle, but it would be nearly flat.

What if you have no sight above the projectile? Same problem, really. No sight, no triangle. 

What if a projectile were shot perfectly level..would canting the sight change left right impact? No, the projectile just drops vertically. 

So I'm going to suggest the model should revolve around "line of bore" or "line of arrow". Using LOB or LOA instead of line of sight, still works. The LOB and LOA must point up from level to hit a target downrange. The triangle created from the perfectly level LOB/LOA versus the elevated LOB/LOA creates a usable triangle regardless of whether there is a sight or not.


----------



## EPLC

I'll ask again: If the arrow follows the cant which seems to be correct, How does this possibly work? Or, does it work? And why or why not please.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Padgett, glad you learned something. Me, I didn't learn a thing. Not since my recurve days have I canted my compound bow. Like you said, stabs all over and levels. And it's not that I didn't know much of what was brought forth. I mean, common sense.... 
.
.
ron, I've read it several times that a straight fletched arrow will spin, not like offset and helical, but will spin. And of all things, Pekin, Illinois, the first time I saw Field shot. There were Indoor shooters there with 1/2" feathers on their arrows and they shot great....


----------



## SonnyThomas

EPLC said:


> I'll ask again: If the arrow follows the cant which seems to be correct, How does this possibly work? Or, does it work? And why or why not please.


No other information given....Left picture, if you didn't care about where the bubble is it might very well work for a specific distance. Right picture, how when the sight is so misaligned with the arrow rest? So was there a error from left pic to right pic? Okay, the sight wasn't moved over to make things look right? 

I don't cant my bow and I don't even know why I joined in here other than I thought some were on the same track just using terms and language that were confusing....


----------



## Padgett

Well I guess for me the last couple of years have been a another lesson in how good you can shoot and have something totally wrong with your bow, I think that my overall strong shooting and training and tuning allow me to have a few little issues like this one and still shoot very well and feel as if I am dead on even when I am not. I am to the point where cleaning up my execution a little and then my bow setup a little and my judging a little could allow me to win out of the semi pro class and that is my goal. This should be one more issue that I don't have to worry about or be blind about anymore.


----------



## EPLC

BTW, I said I would eat crow if I were wrong. While I still have some questions about the proper pivot point and whether or not offsetting the sight bar actually works, it would seem at this point I need to start looking for a good recipe for crow. Any suggestions? 

And Ron... While there may be some turbulent movement, a perfectly straight fletched arrow shouldn't spin. Neither do bullets unless they come out of a rifled barrel. Musket balls do not spin, cannon balls do not spin, buckshot doesn't spin. They may have some circular movement due to other forces at work but they do not spin as a result of flying through the air. Spinning is a forced action, not something that occurs naturally.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> .... a perfectly straight fletched arrow shouldn't spin. Neither do bullets unless they come out of a rifled barrel. Musket balls do not spin, cannon balls do not spin, buckshot doesn't spin. They may have some circular movement due to other forces at work but they do not spin as a result of flying through the air. Spinning is a forced action, not something that occurs naturally


Agreed. Even straight fletched arrows may rotate a little. Between the setup error, inconsistencies in the fletching, and maybe even arrow shaft inconsistencies, there may be "some" rotation, but carefully made "straight fletched" arrow wouldn't rotate enough to be significantly stabilized or otherwise influenced by any rotational or gyroscopic forces.


----------



## Padgett

This morning I totally went to my website articles and I edited and updated my Target Sight Setup, In that setup article I go through how I prefer to setting up first and second and third axis and the order and little tricks that I use. The Changes I made were in the first axis portion, I didn't change the order of things though. I still think that doing second axis first and then first axis and then finishing with third axis is hard to beat so I left it alone.

I did end up choosing to mention the vertical plane and the 4 points that must be in that plane as my only reference to the stuff going on in first axis that needs to be addressed and I said that the nock and the peep and the rest and the sight pin must be on that vertical plane for you to hit from short distances to long distances dead on. Why? Because for most people they just need to hear that setting a bow vertical along with the sight is a important thing and will help you have a solid setup and for a guy that actually needs some proof for his understanding he can read about the 4 points being in the vertical plane and let it rattle around in his brain and either accept it easily or then pm me and ask some questions.

So I kept it simple but I think it will lead people in a better direction than I was before.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Padgett said:


> Well I guess for me the last couple of years have been a another lesson in how good you can shoot and have something totally wrong with your bow, I think that my overall strong shooting and training and tuning allow me to have a few little issues like this one and still shoot very well and feel as if I am dead on even when I am not. I am to the point where cleaning up my execution a little and then my bow setup a little and my judging a little could allow me to win out of the semi pro class and that is my goal. This should be one more issue that I don't have to worry about or be blind about anymore.


I once wrote up a piece, Bow tuning is Secondary. Yeah, things don't have to be perfect and you can still get the job done. I wrote it up from my own experiences and those around me. Myself; IAA Outdoor State Championship, during practice something went off, later found my nock point had slipped. Sighted in for the change and the event started. My arrow porpoised so bad everyone close to me to could see it. End of day one and I was in 3rd place. Went home, found the nock point change and corrected. Day two and still held on to 3rd place and 7th or 8th high score out of 75 total archers. Same event the next year. My arrow rest came loose. It didn't move side to side but bounced up and down. The clamp bolt had froze to give that it was tight and wasn't. Stripped a allen wrench trying break it loose. Not dang thing I could and it was the Day Two. The only thing I could do was shoot the best I could. I finished 3rd. ASA Senior Pro had his arrows porpoising and none of us could find the problem, me, him, others and the arrow manufacturer. Yeah, phone stuck in my ear talking with the arrow people and me shooting his bow trying to get something to work. Glue-in points and no others available. Regardless of the porpoising the bow had accuracy if I did my part right and the ASA Senior Pro did right. He finished 3rd, highest he ever finished. Those shooting with him commented time and time again of his arrow flip flopping to the target, but it hit good. Later it was found the point weight he was using was too heavy. Local boy, in his 30s, did outstanding with his Hoyt in the local 3D, 1st place of 80 in class. His bow was so far out of time you could see it from 5 feet back and you could feel the bottom cam hit and then draw some more and feel the top cam hit. I had many other instances.

Bernie Pellerite, one of his Bernisms (sp?); _"The Paradox of Tuning. Tuning can only be relevant if you have consistent form; and if you have consistent form , tuning then becomes irrelevant."_

Bernie also a nice little article on Canting the bow in the wind. No hog wash like here, just do it this way and the arrow will fall in. He gives only a couple of examples, but enough to get the idea how to do it and maintain a decent score.


----------



## SonnyThomas

nestly said:


> Agreed. Even straight fletched arrows may rotate a little. Between the setup error, inconsistencies in the fletching, and maybe even arrow shaft inconsistencies, there may be "some" rotation, but carefully made "straight fletched" arrow wouldn't rotate enough to be significantly stabilized or otherwise influenced by any rotational or gyroscopic forces.


I can go along with this, some spin present regardless of straight fletched. Randy Ulmer, I believe, went so far as to check a bare shaft for rotation from being shot from your bow ( each bow being different I guess). Yep, mark the bare shaft and see how much it rotates and in what direction. You then are to fletch right or left. Personally, I've got better things to do....or not to do?  Hey, I'm retired........


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, my computer or AT. Doubling up posts again and carrying over quotes. One time I come on AT and I'm in and the next I have to sign in....


----------



## ron w

arrow is traveling in an arc, right ?....... which means one surface of a straight fletched vane, sees the laminar air flow before the other, because the arrow is at an angle to horizontal, while in flight. this causes a pressure differential between top and bottom surfaces of each fletch. and is also one of the reasons there is typically three fletch on an arrow......one fletch os always at an angle f attack to [produce that pressure differential. that pressure differential is the same thing that makes an airplane wing lift an airplane....lower pressure over the top of the wings surface caused by increased air velocity, from it's angle of attack. there doesn't need to be an air foil involved,...ar foils just accentuate the production of that differential,.... just a surface that develops a differential of pressures, from it's angle of attack. do a little search about aircraft wings and "angle of attack.

(Edited)


----------



## Mahly

Topic is: Canting, and sight set up of archery equipment, specifically bows (vs X bows).

Unless directly related to the effects of canting a bow, save the fletching orientation and firearms discussions for another thread, if not forum.


----------



## nestly

Once the arrow is off the string and clear of the bow, the arrow travels in a straight line unless acted upon by another force. Barring wind, the only significant forces that will consistently act upon the arrow are gravity and drag. 

"Significant" being the operative word.


----------



## erdman41

EPLC said:


> I'll ask again: If the arrow follows the cant which seems to be correct, How does this possibly work? Or, does it work? And why or why not please.


Yes it works.

2nd axis needs to be perfect as always.

A 7 degree cant the arrow is off to the side by less than a 1/2".

So if you sight in at 80 yards at 40 yards you will be off less than a 1/4". At 20 yards less than 3/8".

Or you can sight in at 40 yards and be 1/2" off the other direction at 80 yards. And you would be a 1/4 " off at 20 yards.

If you are shooting indoors you would then adjust your windage to 20 yards.


----------



## ron w

nestly said:


> Once the arrow is off the string and clear of the bow, the arrow travels in a straight line unless acted upon by another force. Barring wind, the only significant forces that will consistently act upon the arrow are gravity and drag.
> 
> "Significant" being the operative word.


 so the the arrow's spinning has no significant and/or consistent force on it's stability, trajectory or for that matter, the efforts to stay on it's trajectory and intended course, when pushed by a wind ? what about FOC, it by itself isn't a force, but it is more or less "a controller of forces" that act on the arrow's stability and how much more significant can a force be than the inertia the arrow itself has produced by being launched out if a bow. it has a great influence on where the arrow goes in flight and how consistently it goes there. the inert forces, have as much "stake in the game", as any outside force......as a matter of fact, actually more, because with them, the arrow is not flying through the air.


----------



## Rick!

ron w said:


> arrow is traveling in an arc, right ?....... which means one surface of a straight fletched vane, sees the laminar air flow before the other, because the arrow is at an angle to horizontal, while in flight. this causes a pressure differential between top and bottom surfaces of each fletch. and is also one of the reasons there is typically three fletch on an arrow......one fletch os always at an angle f attack to [produce that pressure differential. that pressure differential is the same thing that makes an airplane wing lift an airplane....lower pressure over the top of the wings surface caused by increased air velocity, from it's angle of attack. there doesn't need to be an air foil involved,...ar foils just accentuate the production of that differential,.... just a surface that develops a differential of pressures, from it's angle of attack. do a little search about aircraft wings and "angle of attack.
> 
> (Edited)


The arrow does not fly with an AOA out of a properly tuned bow. The OP defined the canted bow as tuned perfectly. I would make the assumption that he also meant that the arrows were perfectly tuned also. Nice story though, but not relevant, or correct. Look up AOA, understand how a lifting surface works and report back. The fletches, or vanes, when installed with imperfection, or a slight angle, or helix angle, are at an incident angle to the flow and do impart spinning due to a difference in static pressures on the top and bottom side of the vane. Kinda like the propeller on a beanie. I believe Benelli's , or Bertinelli's, or Bernoulli's, or is it Bernie's theorem applies here. 

Extra credit: what side of the vane with helix angle has the highest dynamic pressure?

How many folk have looked at this thread and just shook their head? I bet a few, or a few hundred...


----------



## ron w

Rick! said:


> The arrow does not fly with an AOA out of a properly tuned bow. The OP defined the canted bow as tuned perfectly. I would make the assumption that he also meant that the arrows were perfectly tuned also. Nice story though, but not relevant, or correct. Look up AOA, understand how a lifting surface works and report back. The fletches, or vanes, when installed with imperfection, or a slight angle, or helix angle, are at an incident angle to the flow and do impart spinning due to a difference in static pressures on the top and bottom side of the vane. Kinda like the propeller on a beanie. I believe Benelli's , or Bertinelli's, or Bernoulli's, or is it Bernie's theorem applies here.
> 
> Extra credit: what side of the vane with helix angle has the highest dynamic pressure?
> 
> How many folk have looked at this thread and just shook their head? I bet a few, or a few hundred...


 it most certainly does. the arrow follows the arc of trajectory at it's FOC. the FOC, is only one point on an arrow's length. the rest of the arrow, both in front of and behind, the FOC, flies at an attitude that is outside the arc of trajectory,.....the arrow is straight, the arc of trajectory is not,....the arrow cannot be on the arc of trajectory for it's entire length. there fore, both ends of the arrow are not following the arc of trajectory. this "misalignment" at the ends of the arrow, if you will allow it to be called that for this purpose, sets the fletching at an angle of attack to the arc of trajectory, which produces the pressure differential between the two faces of a single fletch. this differential produces spin by Bernoulli's theorem. the faster the arrow flies, the more differential in pressure and the higher rate of spin produced. why do think wings an a modern jet are so small and relatively thin, yet can lift the weight of the plane ?.


----------



## ron w

let them shake their heads,....this IS the science of archery, that we all love to do.


----------



## ron w

highest dynamic value, or highest in inches of mercury ?


----------



## SonnyThomas

I'm going to do something more productive, shoot........


----------



## Sasquech

Thanks folks this was a gr8 thread think we all ended up on the same page it is a small thing smaller if you use long distance to set things up. But a complete non issue if you have no cant at all.


----------



## nestly

ron w said:


> so the the arrow's spinning has no significant and/or consistent force on it's stability, trajectory or for that matter, the efforts to stay on it's trajectory and intended course, when pushed by a wind ? what about FOC, it by itself isn't a force, but it is more or less "a controller of forces" that act on the arrow's stability and how much more significant can a force be than the inertia the arrow itself has produced by being launched out if a bow. it has a great influence on where the arrow goes in flight and how consistently it goes there. the inert forces, have as much "stake in the game", as any outside force......as a matter of fact, actually more, because with them, the arrow is not flying through the air.


IMO, there isn't any ambiguity about what I said, I kept it as short and concise as I could. With regard to FOC and twist rate, tournaments are won on the local, state, and national level by archers shooting all over the spectrum with regard to twist rate. Some shoot helical, some shoot offset, some shoot straight. If there was a "right" and "wrong" twist rate, everyone would know about it, and that's what all the winners would be shooting. Ditto for F.O.C., it's all over the place, some win with ridiculously high FOC, others the opposite. Those are variables that are almost exclusively left the discretion of the archer, and neither is relevant to the stated topic of Cant and Sight alignment.


----------



## [email protected]

EPLC said:


> I'll ask again: If the arrow follows the cant which seems to be correct, How does this possibly work? Or, does it work? And why or why not please.


It works in a fashion similar to how much a click moves arrow impact at a given distance. On your sight..say 1 click moves impact 5/32" at 100yds. At 80 1 click moves 4/32" at 60 1 click moves 3/32" at 40 1 click moves 2/32 at 20 1 click moves 1/32". So at 20yds 5 clicks are needed to move impact 5/32..the same as 1 click at 100yds. 

If you look back at the stick drawings I posted( #238) , 20yds is further from centerline than 100yds. 

The ratio of sight reference point distance from centerline is similar, but probably not an exact match, to the click ratio for a given sight.


----------



## [email protected]

nestly said:


> The cropped image you just posted is substantially the same as the photograph, however the original image you posted, and the one I said you should not presume is reflective of his position shows the arrows "path" which is distinctly and conveniently absent the influence of gravity.
> 
> In direct opposition to your original image, I offer this, which while not dimensionally accurate, does accurately demonstrate how canting affects the "path" of an arrow as well as it's point of impact.
> Just to be clear, an arrow that's sitting static on a bow, whether drawn or at brace has no "path", it only has a direction. The "path" is the course it progresses along while in motion.


Are the straight lines to the target in the example "line of sight" or "line of bore" ( line of arrow ) ?


----------



## nuts&bolts

[email protected] said:


> Are the straight lines to the target in the example "line of sight" or "line of bore" ( line of arrow ) ?


Straight line is from peep sight to target bullseye. As you swing the bottom of the riser clockwise for a cant to the shooter's right...the arrow nock must swing in a clockwise arc. With the arrow aimed uphill for a 90 meter shot...and the riser plumb to the earth...the nock is low and the point is high. Standing behind the shooter...a 2D shadow would look like a short vertical line. Arrow trajectory rises up and the falls down into the bullseye. Zero sideways miss. Crank the bow a full 90-degrees...still maintain peep sight to bullseye line of sight...the nock is now at the same height above the ground as the point of the arrow. Arrow is completely horizontal when you cant a bow riser 90-degrees. This is extreme canting. The formerly uphill arrow launch angle is now a horizontal arrow pointed 4 shooting lanes to the right...cuz this is what happens when you have a 90-meter launch angle for the arrow and then cant the riser 90-degrees to the right. The lateral error occurs when you sight in with a plumb to the earth riser...then yiu change the cant angle to something different...like a 90-degree clockwise cant. Vertical arrow launch angle for a plumb to the earth riser becomes a horizontal launch angle four shooting lanes to your right...when you switch from plumb to the earth to something ridiculous like canting your bow riser clockwise a full 90-degrees.


----------



## ron w

if arrows follow the cant, as is now considered, "somewhat correct ".....(whatever that means) ........the view of their path from directly above, when canted, would not be a straight line.


----------



## nestly

[email protected] said:


> Are the straight lines to the target in the example "line of sight" or "line of bore" ( line of arrow ) ?


What lug nut said.
In hindsight, I should have used different colors for line-of-sight and the direction the arrow is pointed relative to the line-of-sight.


----------



## SonnyThomas

ron, there's where the confusion comes. No outside forces, arrows travel in a straight line though it be trajectory wise and off course. The only way to see trajectory is from a side view. Take a X, two straight lines.


----------



## EPLC

ron w said:


> if arrows follow the cant, as is now considered, "somewhat correct ".....(whatever that means) ........the view of their path from directly above, when canted, would not be a straight line.


Actually, it would be a straight line unless some outside horizontal force was present to interfere with the downward gravitational pull.

And for the record, you misquoted me as saying "somewhat correct"... making your quote "somewhat wrong" 😊


----------



## ron w

when the plane of trajectory is canted the trajectory shows it's arc in both the horizontal plane and the vertical plane at the same time. the plane of trajectory is straight, as it is when the bow is not canted, as well, and is projected at what ever angle the cant establishes in respect to the line of site,...but the "trajectory",....the actual curve the arrow makes through the air, is seen as a curve in both planes. 
let's go back to the protractor......
sitting on it's straight edge, on a table top. if held vertically, and viewed from the side, the arc of the protractor's top edge, can be considered an arrows "trajectory",...it's shape of course is not accurate, but for this purpose it is a fine representation. 
now as held vertically, the trajectory can not be seen when viewed from directly above and what is seen, is the "plain of it's trajectory,...that is a straight line. 
it is obvious that the edge as representing the arrow's trajectory will be seen as a curve, if viewed from the side.
now, without changing the view from directly above, cant the protractor to any degree form vertical. the view from directly above has now changed and the edge of the protractor,.... that represents the arrow's "trajectory"....., is now seen as a curve, with it's plane of trajectory at a cant that would represent the angle of cant of the bow.
still, with the protractor canted, the view from the side, shows the edge of the protractor, which represents the trajectory of the arrow, is seen as a curve , as well.
when canted, the trajectory of an arrow is seen as a curve when viewed from directly above and from the side. in neither view can you see the plane of trajectory, it has to be viewed from the angle of cant to be seen as a straight line. 
That is where the confusion exists.....
the straight line that is represented by the arrow's plane of trajectory is where the intended POI is aimed, by the line of sight, which is and always will be two parallel lines. the trajectory "when the bow is canted", can not be parallel to the line of sight in either plane, it can only intersect the line of sight at one point. all other points on it's trajectory will be off the line of sight, in both planes.
now again, without changing the view from directly above, ......
tip the protractor back to vertical. the plane of trajectory and the arrow's actual trajectory and the line of sight, is now seen as a straight line from that view(directly above,...protractor vertical) and all points on the arrow's trajectory represented by the protractor's edge, will be "on", in respect to the line of sight in the vertical plane, but not in the horizontal plane because the arrows trajectory is a curve in relation to the line of sight in the horizontal plane.


----------



## cbrunson

Rick! said:


> The arrow does not fly with an AOA out of a properly tuned bow. The OP defined the canted bow as tuned perfectly. I would make the assumption that he also meant that the arrows were perfectly tuned also. Nice story though, but not relevant, or correct. Look up AOA, understand how a lifting surface works and report back. The fletches, or vanes, when installed with imperfection, or a slight angle, or helix angle, are at an incident angle to the flow and do impart spinning due to a difference in static pressures on the top and bottom side of the vane. Kinda like the propeller on a beanie. I believe Benelli's , or Bertinelli's, or Bernoulli's, or is it Bernie's theorem applies here.
> 
> Extra credit: what side of the vane with helix angle has the highest dynamic pressure?
> 
> How many folk have looked at this thread and just shook their head? I bet a few, or a few hundred...


The majority for sure.

One thing is for certain, no matter how many ways you try to explain it, that fact remains, with a compound bow set up to shoot vertical, when you cant to the right and keep your sight on the target, the arrow WILL miss to the right. It WILL NOT curve back to the target unless the wind pushes it back that direction. A simple field test will prove it for those still questioning it. As someone stated previously though, you would have to be able to consistently shoot sub-3" groups at 60 yards to really see the difference, which might explain why one or more guys here can't seem to grasp the concept.

I have experimented with it at 3D shoots and discovered that it is useful if you want to hold on target and compensate for a visible side wind, but the wind is usually also affecting your ability to hold on target and makes you want to punch it. I find it more advantageous to wait if possible for a break in the wind, or to just hold over a few inches and try to get a good shot execution.

I was on last night at the indoor range and decided to test it at 20 yards. ("on" meaning I shot 23 straight Vegas Xs) I held it with a full bubble off to the right and just caught the ten line at 3 o'clock. The next shot was a full bubble left and just caught the ten at 9 o'clock. So on my set up, it will move a half inch or so at 20 yards. Bare in mind that is with a X27 with 300 gr points at 55 lbs. A faster set up would not show as much movement.


----------



## SonnyThomas

ron w said:


> when the plane of trajectory is canted the trajectory shows it's arc in both the horizontal plane and the vertical plane at the same time. the plane of trajectory is straight, as it is when the bow is not canted, as well, and is projected at what ever angle the cant establishes in respect to the line of site,...but the "trajectory",....the actual curve the arrow makes through the air, is seen as a curve in both planes.
> let's go back to the protractor......
> sitting on it's straight edge, on a table top. if held vertically, and viewed from the side, the arc of the protractor's top edge, can be considered an arrows "trajectory",...it's shape of course is not accurate, but for this purpose it is a fine representation.
> now as held vertically, the trajectory can not be seen when viewed from directly above and what is seen, is the "plain of it's trajectory,...that is a straight line.
> it is obvious that the edge as representing the arrow's trajectory will be seen as a curve, if viewed from the side.
> now, without changing the view from directly above, cant the protractor to any degree form vertical. the view from directly above has now changed and the edge of the protractor,.... that represents the arrow's "trajectory"....., is now seen as a curve, with it's plane of trajectory at a cant that would represent the angle of cant of the bow.
> still, with the protractor canted, the view from the side, shows the edge of the protractor, which represents the trajectory of the arrow, is seen as a curve , as well.
> when canted, the trajectory of an arrow is seen as a curve when viewed from directly above and from the side. in neither view can you see the plane of trajectory, it has to be viewed from the angle of cant to be seen as a straight line.
> That is where the confusion exists.....
> the straight line that is represented by the arrow's plane of trajectory is where the intended POI is aimed, by the line of sight, which is and always will be two parallel lines. the trajectory "when the bow is canted", can not be parallel to the line of sight in either plane, it can only intersect the line of sight at one point. all other points on it's trajectory will be off the line of sight, in both planes.
> now again, without changing the view from directly above, ......
> tip the protractor back to vertical. the plane of trajectory and the arrow's actual trajectory and the line of sight, is now seen as a straight line from that view(directly above,...protractor vertical) and all points on the arrow's trajectory represented by the protractor's edge, will be "on", in respect to the line of sight in the vertical plane, but not in the horizontal plane because the arrows trajectory is a curve in relation to the line of sight in the horizontal plane.


The way you explain it I take the arrow curves from point A to point B in two manners. This can not be. The only curve that exists is that of trajectory. Bow straight up, the trajectory path is that of rising to point of aim and falling due to gravity, a arc. Shoot the bow upside down and the trajectory path is going down to point of aim and continues down due to gravity, still a arc. Cant the bow, the arrow leaves in a straight line in the direction of the cant, rising and falling.


----------



## ron w

you don't understand what is written in the post.


----------



## cbrunson

SonnyThomas said:


> The way you explain it I take the arrow curves from point A to point B in two manners. This can not be. The only curve that exists is that of trajectory. Bow straight up, the trajectory path is that of rising to point of aim and falling due to gravity, a arc. Shoot the bow upside down and the trajectory path is going down to point of aim and continues down due to gravity, still a arc. Cant the bow, the arrow leaves in a straight line in the direction of the cant, rising and falling.


This is correct. 

The bird's eye view will be a straight line.


----------



## thawk

Just how far off do you guys feel the arrow will hit going from 20 yards to 100 yards with a 4-5* cant?
Keep in mind the graph from early on in this topic means nothing because we are not comparing a canted bow to a straight bow, we are using the same 4-5*cant from a tuned bow shot with a sight mounted level.

I'm not sure of the math and quit frankly I don't care enough to figure it out but with an average peep height of 4" I would bet the peep is not moved off centerline more then a 1/16 and a average sight tape going from 20-100 yards being about 3" just how far off do you think things really are.

IMO, shooting a bow straight that is uncomfortable will cause you to miss way more often then shooting comfortably. If for no other reason then your more likely to loose your bubble if its not a natural feel.

One other question, if a string and a sight have to be in a straight line, how do one cam bows work if you level your sight to the riser?


----------



## Padgett

Shooting with a natural can't to me really is pointless if you are using rear bars, I can remember this last winter when I did a sight setup standing there thinking I could just move my rear bar in a little and make my bow vertical, I simply chose not to because at that time I believed that shooting with natural cant was totally and equally as accurate as shooting with a vertical bow. Back a few years ago when target bows didn't have rear bars or v bars the design of the bow and sight could really put a lot of weight off to one side and cause you to have to fight the bow to get it veritical so I could see why it was a issue. 

If you have a target bow with a full set of stabs to me you are crazy to not just set the first axis and get your bow perfectly vertical because nobody is debating that it isn't a good choice, we have debated weather or not a natural cant is a good choice or not and so if you choose the natural cant you are choosing to take a risk. That is what I did for the last few years because in the beginning I totally knew deep down in my heart that a perfectly vertical bow was the way to go but I was convinced by people that I had a choice that was equally as good. Back then I didn't have a full set of stabs so it was a exciting thing to have the freedom to set it up with a cant.


----------



## cbrunson

thawk said:


> Just how far off do you guys feel the arrow will hit going from 20 yards to 100 yards with a 4-5* cant? It would depend on the speed of the arrow. The steeper the angle coming off the rest, the more dramatic the effects of the cant would be.
> 
> 
> I'm not sure of the math and quit frankly I don't care enough to figure it out but with an average peep height of 4" I would bet the peep is not moved off centerline more then a 1/16 and a average sight tape going from 20-100 yards being about 3" just how far off do you think things really are. The peep shouldn't be off. The angle of the arrow to line of sight (vertically) will determine the offset
> 
> IMO, shooting a bow straight that is uncomfortable will cause you to miss way more often then shooting comfortably. If for no other reason then your more likely to loose your bubble if its not a natural feel. True. As long as you don't exceed adjustment on your sight and or rest to keep them inline vertically.
> 
> One other question, if a string and a sight have to be in a straight line, how do one cam bows work if you level your sight to the riser? The cam type does not affect this scenario. It should be assumed that the bow is tuned and the only reference between the sight and string is the path from the nock point at full draw to the executed shot, where the initial trajectory is established. Regardless of how close to perfectly vertical you hold the bow, when you tune it and then adjust your 2nd and 3rd axis and sight in, you automatically bring everything to the required vertical plane. If you cant naturally to the right, your windage adjustment will likely be more to the right as well. (assuming your bow is tuned correctly and your centershot is not far off)


.....


----------



## cbrunson

Padgett said:


> Shooting with a natural can't to me really is pointless if you are using rear bars, I can remember this last winter when I did a sight setup standing there thinking I could just move my rear bar in a little and make my bow vertical, I simply chose not to because at that time I believed that shooting with natural cant was totally and equally as accurate as shooting with a vertical bow. Back a few years ago when target bows didn't have rear bars or v bars the design of the bow and sight could really put a lot of weight off to one side and cause you to have to fight the bow to get it veritical so I could see why it was a issue.
> 
> If you have a target bow with a full set of stabs to me you are crazy to not just set the first axis and get your bow perfectly vertical because nobody is debating that it isn't a good choice, we have debated weather or not a natural cant is a good choice or not and so if you choose the natural cant you are choosing to take a risk. That is what I did for the last few years because in the beginning I totally knew deep down in my heart that a perfectly vertical bow was the way to go but I was convinced by people that I had a choice that was equally as good. Back then I didn't have a full set of stabs so it was a exciting thing to have the freedom to set it up with a cant.


That's how I set mine up. I like it to sit naturally level at full draw. The back bar (angle) is where I make that adjustment. It's funny how it doesn't work on uneven ground though. You still have to force it on a side hill. Just enough difference in form to throw it off I guess.


----------



## erdman41

Padgett said:


> Shooting with a natural can't to me really is pointless if you are using rear bars, I can remember this last winter when I did a sight setup standing there thinking I could just move my rear bar in a little and make my bow vertical, I simply chose not to because at that time I believed that shooting with natural cant was totally and equally as accurate as shooting with a vertical bow. Back a few years ago when target bows didn't have rear bars or v bars the design of the bow and sight could really put a lot of weight off to one side and cause you to have to fight the bow to get it veritical so I could see why it was a issue.
> 
> If you have a target bow with a full set of stabs to me you are crazy to not just set the first axis and get your bow perfectly vertical because nobody is debating that it isn't a good choice, we have debated weather or not a natural cant is a good choice or not and so if you choose the natural cant you are choosing to take a risk. That is what I did for the last few years because in the beginning I totally knew deep down in my heart that a perfectly vertical bow was the way to go but I was convinced by people that I had a choice that was equally as good. Back then I didn't have a full set of stabs so it was a exciting thing to have the freedom to set it up with a cant.


And by vertical bow you mean vertical string. They are not always one in the same depending on cam systems.


----------



## TNMAN

cbrunson said:


> That's how I set mine up. I like it to sit naturally level at full draw. The back bar (angle) is where I make that adjustment. It's funny how it doesn't work on uneven ground though. You still have to force it on a side hill. Just enough difference in form to throw it off I guess.


Maybe not so much a difference in form as just a bunch of dumb stab weights. The only direction they know how to pull is straight down.


----------



## [email protected]

nuts&bolts said:


> Straight line is from peep sight to target bullseye. As you swing the bottom of the riser clockwise for a cant to the shooter's right...the arrow nock must swing in a clockwise arc. With the arrow aimed uphill for a 90 meter shot...and the riser plumb to the earth...the nock is low and the point is high. Standing behind the shooter...a 2D shadow would look like a short vertical line. Arrow trajectory rises up and the falls down into the bullseye. Zero sideways miss. Crank the bow a full 90-degrees...still maintain peep sight to bullseye line of sight...the nock is now at the same height above the ground as the point of the arrow. Arrow is completely horizontal when you cant a bow riser 90-degrees. This is extreme canting. The formerly uphill arrow launch angle is now a horizontal arrow pointed 4 shooting lanes to the right...cuz this is what happens when you have a 90-meter launch angle for the arrow and then cant the riser 90-degrees to the right. The lateral error occurs when you sight in with a plumb to the earth riser...then yiu change the cant angle to something different...like a 90-degree clockwise cant. Vertical arrow launch angle for a plumb to the earth riser becomes a horizontal launch angle four shooting lanes to your right...when you switch from plumb to the earth to something ridiculous like canting your bow riser clockwise a full 90-degrees.


Alan,

I guess the point I'm trying to make is that "line of sight" (LOS) is a red herring. LOS is not needed to make the model work. It's a carry over from the rifle example with the scope above "line of bore" (LOB). 

The LOS concept you introduced of rotating around an axis works with LOB without the need for a sight. 

LOB is just the centerline of any projectile pointing in a line to the target.


----------



## nestly

Maybe this will clear it up for some ??? Instead of getting caught up in the position of the bow, image the drawn arrow is fixed and the bow is rotated/canted about the axis of the arrow. After all, it's the arrows alignment with the target that determines where the arrow lands, not the bow's alignment with the target. 

Try to keep an open mind for 7 minutes....


----------



## EPLC

*Cant Sight Adjustment*

In my first post I suggested that this was an aiming issue. After looking at this again I have to go back to this line of thinking. My initial thinking was 180 degrees off, but I've done some study since. Maybe a little less crow on my plate? Hope so.  

I believe the following will explain why adjusting the sight bar 90 degrees to earth actually does work. It also provides some evidence that the pivot may actually be closer to the arrow than to the line of sight. But, regardless of what pivot point you choose, I contend that this is no more than a sighting issue than a pivotal issue. In the example pictured the archer shoots from a straight line from varying distances to a stationary target. The left handed archer has a severe right cant. 

In Figure A the 15 yard canted shot would be very close to center, as verified by my short range testing. As the archer moves back to farther and farther distances he/she would have to aim farther and farther to the right as the sight was moved to a lower position on the canted bar. This would result in a right miss POI that continually moves farther to the right as the distance and sight setting increased. 

In Figure B the sight bar has been adjusted to 90 degrees. The cant of the bow remains unchanged, but the sight now lines up with the target from all distances. Many thanks to those that have made me really think about this. Anyway, I'd like to hear some thoughts on this opinion.


----------



## Mahly

ron w said:


> when the plane of trajectory is canted the trajectory shows it's arc in both the horizontal plane and the vertical plane at the same time. the plane of trajectory is straight, as it is when the bow is not canted, as well, and is projected at what ever angle the cant establishes in respect to the line of site,...but the "trajectory",....the actual curve the arrow makes through the air, is seen as a curve in both planes.
> let's go back to the protractor......
> sitting on it's straight edge, on a table top. if held vertically, and viewed from the side, the arc of the protractor's top edge, can be considered an arrows "trajectory",...it's shape of course is not accurate, but for this purpose it is a fine representation.
> now as held vertically, the trajectory can not be seen when viewed from directly above and what is seen, is the "plain of it's trajectory,...that is a straight line.
> it is obvious that the edge as representing the arrow's trajectory will be seen as a curve, if viewed from the side.
> now, without changing the view from directly above, cant the protractor to any degree form vertical. the view from directly above has now changed and the edge of the protractor,.... that represents the arrow's "trajectory"....., is now seen as a curve, with it's plane of trajectory at a cant that would represent the angle of cant of the bow.
> still, with the protractor canted, the view from the side, shows the edge of the protractor, which represents the trajectory of the arrow, is seen as a curve , as well.
> when canted, the trajectory of an arrow is seen as a curve when viewed from directly above and from the side. in neither view can you see the plane of trajectory, it has to be viewed from the angle of cant to be seen as a straight line.
> That is where the confusion exists.....
> the straight line that is represented by the arrow's plane of trajectory is where the intended POI is aimed, by the line of sight, which is and always will be two parallel lines. the trajectory "when the bow is canted", can not be parallel to the line of sight in either plane, it can only intersect the line of sight at one point. all other points on it's trajectory will be off the line of sight, in both planes.
> now again, without changing the view from directly above, ......
> tip the protractor back to vertical. the plane of trajectory and the arrow's actual trajectory and the line of sight, is now seen as a straight line from that view(directly above,...protractor vertical) and all points on the arrow's trajectory represented by the protractor's edge, will be "on", in respect to the line of sight in the vertical plane, but not in the horizontal plane because the arrows trajectory is a curve in relation to the line of sight in the horizontal plane.


Semantics and wrong use of terminology by some. No one is suggesting the trajectory tilts, or that the arrows path from a canted bow is differently affected by gravity.


----------



## EPLC

In addition, the problem with having the line of sight as the pivot point is that this would create a pendulum effect with the arrow, swinging like a kids swing set. A bow that is canted isn't moving, it's just canted. As the unadjusted sight moves down the canted bar it moves on a constant angle, not a pendulum like motion.


----------



## Mahly

I think you are close, but your still not accounting for the fact that the arrow starts left of your point of aim on the bow, and needs to move to the right to hit the target.
Of course it is only SLIGHTLY left of your point of aim, so it isn't a huge deal. Zeroing in at say 50 yards, you would be very slightly left at less than 50 yards, and slightly right at more than 50 yards. Depending on the amount of can't this may be negligible, resulting in what is effectively grouping on target at multiple ranges.
Now if you angled the mounting of the sight bar so it is slightly beyond vertical, then adjusted the scope itself to be level, you'd be even better.

Something like this (just modified the Gene Luck image)


----------



## cbrunson

[email protected] said:


> Alan,
> 
> I guess the point I'm trying to make is that "line of sight" (LOS) is a red herring. LOS is not needed to make the model work. It's a carry over from the rifle example with the scope above "line of bore" (LOB).
> 
> The LOS concept you introduced of rotating around an axis works with LOB without the need for a sight.
> 
> LOB is just the centerline of any projectile pointing in a line to the target.


The importance of the line of sight is to show the change of POI with a cant. It's important to note that the projectile POI moves with the cant while keeping the crosshairs (or pin) centered on the target.


----------



## Padgett

I have hurt myself really bad sunday and see a surgeon today at 3pm so I haven't got to play with my 3d bow at all, I do plan to put some time into it and look at it and get my first axis set up as best that I can. I want to put my bow in my hooter shooter and use a level to see how the riser compares to the bow string at rest and at full draw. I have a feeling that I will set my first axis to the bow string and that at rest will be good enough but I am also really interested to see if the bow changes from as the bow is drawn. I do know that some bows that have hybrid cams where the top is centered and the bottom is offset in the split limbs do appear to have a string that isn't lined up with the riser very well. 

Hey I was a guy that believed in natural cant so I have to do the work to see what my bow checks out to be now that I am converted.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> In addition, the problem with having the line of sight as the pivot point is that this would create a pendulum effect with the arrow, swinging like a kids swing set. A bow that is canted isn't moving, it's just canted. As the unadjusted sight moves down the canted bar it moves on a constant angle, not a pendulum like motion.


That's precisely what causes the change in direction of the arrow.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> That's precisely what causes the change in direction of the arrow.


I guess it just depends on your perception. Did you look at my example?


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> Anyway, I'd like to hear some thoughts on this opinion.




"Figure A." in your illustration is substantively correct.

"Figure B" isn't quite correct because as noted above, if the bow is canted, the arrow begins either to the left or the right of the peep. The arrow is not the same vertical plane as the peep, pin, and target. Since it didn't start on that plane, it can't travel on that plane. It must either travel parallel with it, travel away from it, or travel across it.

Scenario #1. Sight the bow in so the arrow impacts a distance left or right of the bullseye that's equal to the distance the arrow is left or right of the peep. The arrow and the vertical sight plane will be parallel, but offset slightly. You'll hit the same distance left or right at every distance, depending on whether the arrow started out left or right of the peep. (ie which way it was canted)

Scenario #2. Sight the bow in to be dead on at one distance. Because the arrow starts out left or right peep, it has to travel across a vertical plane defined by the peep, pin, and target. Arrow will always impact one one side of that plane before it intersects the vertical sight plane, and it will always be on the other side after it intersects the vertical sight plane.


----------



## cbrunson

EPLC said:


> I guess it just depends on your perception. Did you look at my example?


Edit - I believe we are on the same page. I was referring to an intentional cant with a bow already set up to be vertical, and the effects of the cant. Your model is correct in showing that it can be corrected with the sight elevation travel.


----------



## cbrunson

nestly said:


> "Figure A." in your illustration is substantively correct.
> 
> "Figure B" isn't quite correct because as noted above, if the bow is canted, the arrow begins either to the left or the right of the peep. The arrow is not the same vertical plane as the peep, pin, and target. Since it didn't start on that plane, it can't travel on that plane. It must either travel parallel with it, travel away from it, or travel across it.
> 
> Scenario #1. Sight the bow in so the arrow impacts a distance left or right of the bullseye that's equal to the distance the arrow is left or right of the peep. The arrow and the vertical sight plane will be parallel, but offset slightly. You'll hit the same distance left or right at every distance.
> 
> Scenario #2. Sight the bow in to be dead on at one distance. Because the arrow starts out left or right peep, it has to travel across a vertical plane defined by the peep, pin, and target. Arrow will always impact one one side of that plane before it intersects the vertical sight plane, and it will always be on the other side after it intersects the vertical sight plane.


In figure B he has adjusted the sight bar to be parallel with the vertical travel of the arrow, bringing the angle back on plane with the line of sight at various distances.


----------



## EPLC

Mahly said:


> I think you are close, but your still not accounting for the fact that the arrow starts left of your point of aim on the bow, and needs to move to the right to hit the target.
> Of course it is only SLIGHTLY left of your point of aim, so it isn't a huge deal. Zeroing in at say 50 yards, you would be very slightly left at less than 50 yards, and slightly right at more than 50 yards. Depending on the amount of can't this may be negligible, resulting in what is effectively grouping on target at multiple ranges.
> Now if you angled the mounting of the sight bar so it is slightly beyond vertical, then adjusted the scope itself to be level, you'd be even better.
> 
> Something like this (just modified the Gene Luck image)
> 
> View attachment 2801994


Actually, the arrow position is a consent in the example and has no relationship to the cant of the bow riser, which is also assumed a constant.


----------



## ILOVE3D

anybody want to wager this thread reaches 500 posts if not removed?


----------



## Mahly

I think it would be better if we just stayed on topic :wink:


----------



## nestly

cbrunson said:


> In figure B he has adjusted the sight bar to be parallel with the vertical travel of the arrow, bringing the angle back on plane with the line of sight at various distances.


If the bow is canted, the arrow is still starting out either left or right of a vertical plane that include the peep, pin, and target. In other words, drop a plumb bob down from the peep sight. There is only one plane that contain the Peep, the sight pin, the target and plumb bob. Since the plumb bob is hanging from the peep, the plane must be vertically oriented. The arrow will not be on that same plane. The bow is canted, the plumb bob is hanging from the peep. The arrow is not directly below the peep. If the arrow doesn't start on that plane, it's path cannot lie on that plane.


----------



## cbrunson

nestly said:


> If the bow is canted, the arrow is still starting out either left or right of a vertical plane that include the peep, pin, and target. In other words, drop a plumb bob down from the peep sight. There is only one plane that contain the Peep, the sight pin, the target and plumb bob. Since the plumb bob is hanging from the peep, the plane must be vertically oriented. The arrow will not be on that same plane. The bow is canted, the plumb bob is hanging from the peep. The arrow is not directly below the peep. If the arrow doesn't start on that plane, it's path cannot lie on that plane.


I agree. By moving the sight windage and plumbing the sight frame you can compensate for it though. I'm talking a couple degrees off of perfectly vertical, nothing as extreme as shown in the examples.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> Actually, the arrow position is a consent in the example and has no relationship to the cant of the bow riser, which is also assumed a constant.



If the arrow, scope, target and POI all exist on one plane, then so must the peep, and if the the arrow only travels on a vertical plane, then the plane defined by that arrow, scope, target, POI, and peep must be vertical, in which case the string is vertical. The controls you've established only exist for a non-canted bow.


----------



## nestly

cbrunson said:


> I agree. By moving the sight windage and plumbing the sight frame you can compensate for it though. I'm talking a couple degrees off of perfectly vertical, nothing as extreme as shown in the examples.


I think we're probably in agreement. A small amount of misalignment can be compensated for by the archer (if they're even precise enough to realize it exists) I work with CAD all day, and virtually every measurement I take is displayed to me with precision 8 places to the right of decimal point. In most cases, I would say "average" to "good" archers don't need to to worry about anything less than 1/2 a bubble. I'm thinking there are a lot of archers in this discussion that are better than "good", but perhaps also some that aren't.


----------



## cbrunson

nestly said:


> I think we're probably in agreement. A small amount of misalignment can be compensated for by the archer (if they're even precise enough to realize it exists) I work with CAD all day, and virtually every measurement I take is displayed to me with precision 8 places to the right of decimal point. In most cases, I would say "average" to "good" archers don't need to to worry about anything less than 1/2 a bubble. I'm thinking there are a lot of archers in this discussion that are better than "good", but perhaps also some that aren't.


Agreed.


----------



## [email protected]

nestly said:


> Maybe this will clear it up for some ??? Instead of getting caught up in the position of the bow, image the drawn arrow is fixed and the bow is rotated/canted about the axis of the arrow. After all, it's the arrows alignment with the target that determines where the arrow lands, not the bow's alignment with the target.
> 
> Try to keep an open mind for 7 minutes....


Nestly,

You have to work the model around the relevant vector. Which is the theoretical line of the projectile to the target; a straight line that does not need to be level.

In order to hit the target from any distance, the launch angle of the projectile must be an angle different than the theoretical line of the projectile to the target. 

In the model, the origin of the projectile is what everything rotates relative to when elevating for the shot or canting the bow. For an arrow, this is the nock where it attaches to the string. The change in elevation to make a shot or bow cant is relative to the theoretical line of the projectile to the target.

Assuming that all parts of the system..front pin, peep, arrow rest..are in vertical alignment with the centerline of the arrow. Vertical orientation is arrow rest, centerline of the arrow, 100yd pin position, 20yd pin position, peep sight.

When you change the elevation of the bow and arrow from the theoretical line of the projectile to the target, cant will have effect on the direction the arrow points and the line of sight.

When you cant the bow, the arrow rest moves out of vertical alignment with the theoretical line of the projectile to the target taking the arrow with it. Cant right, arrow points right. The 100 yard pin moves out of alignment more than the arrow rest. The 20yd pin move more than the 100yd pin. The peep sight moves even further than the 20yd pin.

When you cant the bow right the line of bore of the arrow points right because its endpoint is the nock and the rest moved right. Conversely, the line of sight moves to the left because its endpoint is the peep and the peep move further to the right than the 20yd pin or the 100yd pin. You've created two intersecting lines where before the was a line of sight that followed the trajectory path of the arrow.


----------



## SonnyThomas

I'll have to think about the peep moving. I gotta see through it. Just taking a break from replacing switch for water pump. Country living, we have a well.


----------



## nestly

[email protected] said:


> Nestly,
> 
> You have to work the model around the relevant vector. Which is the theoretical line of the projectile to the target; a straight line that does not need to be level.


The constant in the model is the arrow's orientation to the target. It matter not whether the arrow is propelled by a bow (vertical or otherwise), thrown like a spear, shot out of a very large blowgun, or stuffed down the barrel of a muzzleloader. If the arrow beings at Point A and is pointed exactly 3 degrees upward and 0.000000 degrees relative to the target, it going to land at the same place every time assuming the bow, javelin thrower, blow-gunner, and muzzleloader all achieve the same launch velocity. That's what the video shows. 

Yes, you have to re-adjust the sights each time you change the cant angle of the bow to make the arrow be precisely angled upward 3 degrees and angled 0 degrees relative to the target, but that's that's both shown and stated explicitly in the video.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> If the arrow, scope, target and POI all exist on one plane, then so must the peep, and if the the arrow only travels on a vertical plane, then the plane defined by that arrow, scope, target, POI, and peep must be vertical, in which case the string is vertical. The controls you've established only exist for a non-canted bow.


I think the peep is just confusing things. Remove it and then what? Does the arrow go in a different direction? The arrow goes in the direction it is being pointed, no more.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> I think the peep is just confusing things. Remove it and then what? Does the arrow go in a different direction? The arrow goes in the direction it is being pointed, no more.


Well, go ahead and add a peep as a 4th control in your Figure D. Put the peep where ever you think it should be. ( bet you center it directly in line with the target and front sight, since that's the only place it can be if you're using it to aim at the target. If the peep is directly above the arrow/nock... then the bow (technically the string) has to be vertical (ie no cant)


----------



## redman

GREAT info I been shooting with a cant in sight I am going to set up my sight with out cant and see it helps with rights and lefts


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> Well, go ahead and add a peep as a 4th control in your Figure D. Put the peep where ever you think it should be. ( bet you center it directly in line with the target and front sight, since that's the only place it can be if you're using it to aim at the target. If the peep is directly above the arrow/nock... then the bow (technically the string) has to be vertical (ie no cant)


I have another idea. If the path of the arrow is determined by cant angle then the arrow will always follow the cant, regardless of the distance. Of course, the greater the distance, the greater the POI error to the canted side. Since I can't really get comfortable with the pivot being the line of sight, I'd like to prove this out, one way or another, with a test. The test is simple. Sight in the canted, uncorrected bow at 80 yards and then shoot the bow at 15 yards with a sight and cant setting to match. If the pivot is actually the line of sight, the POI error will still favor the cant. If it is simply a sighting issue the POI should reverse... I think? 

P.S. As you can see, I'm trying very hard to keep crow off my plate.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> Maybe this will clear it up for some ??? Instead of getting caught up in the position of the bow, image the drawn arrow is fixed and the bow is rotated/canted about the axis of the arrow. After all, it's the arrows alignment with the target that determines where the arrow lands, not the bow's alignment with the target.
> 
> Try to keep an open mind for 7 minutes....


Btw, I did invest the 7 minutes. I do not see anything in your video that I would disagree with. And I really think that SW is much better than doing it in PowerPoint


----------



## jim p

I haven't read the complete thread so I don't know what is the question or theory being answered. However, Oldpro used to shoot with his bow canted about 15 degrees. All he did was cant his sight with shims so that his sight was vertical when his bow was canted. The arrow falls along a vertical line no matter how the bow is canted. A cross bow is canted 90 degrees and the sights work fine.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> ..... *If the path of the arrow is determined by cant angle*


It does not, you would be best served to eliminate that notion right now and never consider it again. Canting the bow DOES change the direction the arrow is pointed, but it DOES NOT cause the arrow to follow a "canted" path. The "path" of the arrow will always be vertical... straight up, then straight down. Newton was not wrong.



EPLC said:


> then the arrow will always follow the cant, regardless of the distance.


see above.... arrow does not follow cant, only the direction it's pointed changes with various cants.



EPLC said:


> Since I can't really get comfortable with the pivot being the line of sight


Well, the sights are the only reference we have to the target. They're the only thing we can use as a "pivot", but you're correct that they make a terrible "pivot" point if the bow is not canted consistently. It's the arrow that has to strike the bullseye, not the bow and not the sights. Establish the cant you want (if you want any), then level the sight bar, then move the sights until the arrow hits where you need it to.



EPLC said:


> P.S. As you can see, I'm trying very hard to keep crow off my plate.


Nothing wrong with crow... it's good for you, but only when you're actually wrong. As near as I can tell, you were mostly correct before things got so twisted. 

With regard to Figure A thru D:


----------



## [email protected]

EPLC said:


> I have another idea. If the path of the arrow is determined by cant angle then the arrow will always follow the cant, regardless of the distance. Of course, the greater the distance, the greater the POI error to the canted side. Since I can't really get comfortable with the pivot being the line of sight, I'd like to prove this out, one way or another, with a test. The test is simple. Sight in the canted, uncorrected bow at 80 yards and then shoot the bow at 15 yards with a sight and cant setting to match. If the pivot is actually the line of sight, the POI error will still favor the cant. If it is simply a sighting issue the POI should reverse... I think?
> 
> P.S. As you can see, I'm trying very hard to keep crow off my plate.


EPLC,

Put your bow in the Hooter Shooter and set it perfectly plumb..sight frame level for left/right. Sight set for a 100yds shot. Arrow should now point up ~3 degrees from level with floor. Get a photo tripod. Attach an arrow to the tripod deck as a pointer. Set the point of the tripod arrow to the point of the arrow in the bow. Cant the bow away from the tripod. Did the points remain touching or did the cant create a gap?

You wouldn't need the tripod setup if you had one of these..
http://www.ebay.com/sch/items/?_nkw...12&_fpos=&_fspt=1&_sadis=&LH_CAds=&rmvSB=true


----------



## ILOVE3D

[email protected] said:


> EPLC,
> 
> Put your bow in the Hooter Shooter and set it perfectly plumb..sight frame level for left/right. Sight set for a 100yds shot. Arrow should now point up ~3 degrees from level with floor. Get a photo tripod. Attach an arrow to the tripod deck as a pointer. Set the point of the tripod arrow to the point of the arrow in the bow. Cant the bow away from the tripod. Did the points remain touching or did the cant create a gap?
> 
> 
> You wouldn't need the tripod setup if you had one of these..
> http://www.ebay.com/sch/items/?_nkw...12&_fpos=&_fspt=1&_sadis=&LH_CAds=&rmvSB=true


As long as you aim with the sight system at the same target, peep and pin the rear of the arrow will move opposite the cant thus making the arrow hit off to one side whichever the bow is canted. The point of the arrow in the bow will move but not as much but the nock end Keep in mind that moving the nock end of a 30" arrow say only 1/4" will only move the arrow about 30" at 100 yards providing there is no side wind and shot is perfect.(if my math is correct) I'm guessing the vast majority of the guys on AT wouldn't know how much the 30" was their form, bad release or whatever or even realize they canted the bow to begin with. I would think most of the guys reading this would notice the difference and think "what did I do on that shot" because 30" even at 100 yards is a bunch and probably a miss. None of us would not do well competing with that much error. The last video was great and showed as much and the more you cant, the more off to one side the arrow will travel providing as said before, no other factors like wind changing the degree of exactly how far.


----------



## SonnyThomas

jim p said:


> I haven't read the complete thread so I don't know what is the question or theory being answered. However, Oldpro used to shoot with his bow canted about 15 degrees. All he did was cant his sight with shims so that his sight was vertical when his bow was canted. The arrow falls along a vertical line no matter how the bow is canted. A cross bow is canted 90 degrees and the sights work fine.


There are some difference. The cross bow was made to shoot at 90 degrees. The sights are for 90 degrees. Center shot is in the middle of ata, if this makes a difference. Crossbows are shot by..... I better not say that  Like the bow the arrow rises to the pin and drops due to gravity. Cant the crossbow and the arrow is going to go in the direction of cant, right, right, left, left.


----------



## nestly

SonnyThomas said:


> There are some difference. The cross bow was made to shoot at 90 degrees. The sights are for 90 degrees. Center shot is in the middle of ata, if this makes a difference. Crossbows are shot by..... I better not say that  Like the bow the arrow rises to the pin and drops due to gravity. Cant the crossbow and the arrow is going to go in the direction of cant, right, right, left, left.


All that ^^^^ PLUS the rear sight on a crossbow isn't restricted to the string. That's what makes sight alignment on a bow such a difficult nut to crack, we have very little control over the rear sight (peep) orientation. The only time the rear sight (peep) can be directly above the arrow and on the same plane as the arrows path is when the bow/bowstring is perfectly vertical.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> It does not, you would be best served to eliminate that notion right now and never consider it again. Canting the bow DOES change the direction the arrow is pointed, but it DOES NOT cause the arrow to follow a "canted" path. The "path" of the arrow will always be vertical... straight up, then straight down. Newton was not wrong.


I'm not saying what you think I'm saying. I'm in total 100% agreement with you and Newton. Btw, a close friend on my uncle John... (well, I guess cousin?) 

With the exception of the crow, we are in agreement for the most part. Perhaps we are saying the same thing differently. Now I'll watch the video before any more comment. 

Ok, watched the video. Nothing new to understand as I get it. Still, I think there is a problem with the pivot. I actually liked the last video more and feel it is closer to where I'm going with this. Of course I could be wrong as this is a learning experience for me. My test will prove or disprove my doubts.


----------



## [email protected]

nestly said:


>


Watched the video. Watched the nock end of the arrow swing in an arc. Not real world. The nock end of the arrow has very little movement in the real world.

When you cant a bow, does the nock end of your arrow swing side to side in an arc? No. 

When you cant a bow, is the nock end of your arrow relatively fixed to the anchor point at the side of your face? Yes. 

When you cant a bow, does the sight move in an arc relative to the nock point and the theoretical line of bore? Yes.

When you cant a bow, does the string remain aligned with centerline of the arrow as in the original vertical plane? No.


----------



## nestly

[email protected] said:


> Watched the video. Watched the nock end of the arrow swing in an arc. Not real world..


I'm sorry, but you're mistaken about the arrow moving. The video named "Projectile basics" is a Screencast capture of an AutoCAD model. (AutoCAD calculates 16 places to the right of the decimal point internally, although only 8 places are normally displayed to the user) The absolute XYZ coordinates in the WCS (World Coordinate System) for the center of the groove in the arrow's nock and the tip of the arrow's point are shown below. Converted to straight line and angular values, the arrow is 25.962750 units long, angled 90.0 degrees in the XY plane (North) and angled 3.0 degrees in the YZ plane.

The video named "projectile basics" does not purport to mimic what actually happens when an archer cants a bow, that would likely rotate the bow/arrow around somewhere on the grip/wrist and the back of the D-Loop. The video explicitly and repeatedly states that everything rotates about the arrow (the longitudinal axis of the arrow). The purpose is not to prove that canting does or does not change the arrow point of impact when a front and rear sight are used to align the bow/arrow with the target, that's not up for debate as far as I know, the purpose is to show that the arrow "path" is not influenced by cant. (As it relates to exterior ballistics, "path" is the combination of forward and vertical motion.) Surely you agree that an archer shooting a right canted bow could point the arrow due north and angled upward at 3 degrees. He could do the same while holding the bow vertical, and also do the same while canting the bow left. In all 3 cases, the arrow, which would be pointed due north and angled upward 3 degrees would strike the target in the same place. That's what the video named "projectile basics" shows.... nothing more, nothing less.


----------



## jim p

When you start shooting with a cant, you will need to tune the bow to work with the cant. You will need to cant the sight and you will need to move the rest. If you want to cant the bow 45 degrees, you are probably going to run out of adjustment room because the riser is going to get in the way. If you want to cant the bow 5 degrees, you are not going to have a problem.

Oldpro shot very well with his canted system.


----------



## nestly

jim p said:


> When you start shooting with a cant, you will need to tune the bow to work with the cant. You will need to cant the sight and you will need to move the rest. If you want to cant the bow 45 degrees, you are probably going to run out of adjustment room because the riser is going to get in the way. If you want to cant the bow 5 degrees, you are not going to have a problem.
> 
> Oldpro shot very well with his canted system.


+1

I was having trouble getting bullets through paper with bare shafts up close. Turned out it was because I have poor lighting on my front sight when standing close to where I have the paper tuner mounted and I wasn't able to see the bubble peripherally. Apparently I either was not paying attention to the bubble, or I was straining too hard to see the bubble and wasn't focusing on the shot. More light made my paper tears much more consistent. Kinda scary how much bare shafts reveal about your form.


----------



## Sasquech

You definitely want to keep the sight parallel to the riser you will then get sight moving left and right along the cant and compensating for the cant. If you make the sight bar plumb with respect to the ground that is where the error is introduced.


----------



## EPLC

Sasquech said:


> You definitely want to keep the sight parallel to the riser you will then get sight moving left and right along the cant and compensating for the cant. If you make the sight bar plumb with respect to the ground that is where the error is introduced.


So you are saying you can't fix a cant by setting the sight bar at 90 degrees to offset the can't? If that is your position I will have to disagree.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> +1
> 
> I was having trouble getting bullets through paper with bare shafts up close. Turned out it was because I have poor lighting on my front sight when standing close to where I have the paper tuner mounted and I wasn't able to see the bubble peripherally. Apparently I either was not paying attention to the bubble, or I was straining too hard to see the bubble and wasn't focusing on the shot. More light made my paper tears much more consistent. Kinda scary how much bare shafts reveal about your form.


Not sure what connection paper tuning and bubble have to do with this?


----------



## nestly

It was a confirmation of post #370, if the bow is tuned perfectly while the bow is perfectly vertical, it won't necessarily still be perfectly tuned when canted (or vice versa) There are multiple factors, including but not limited to:

a) When the bows cant changes it moves the arrow nock either left or right of the peep. If the nock position is changing in relationship to the peep, so must the eye be changing in relationship to the anchor. Either the head has to be tipped, or the anchor pressed harder or less hard against the face, or a combination of both. (admittedly a small cant is a subtle change, but bare shafts in particular are very sensitive to very subtle changes)

b) If the bow's cant changes, so does the way it contacts the shooters hand, Inconsistent hand placement will result in inconsistent tuning. Alternately, the shooter might try to maintain the hand/bow relationship, but then rotating the hand as the bow cant angle changes results in the shooters elbow/shoulder position moving slightly. 

Again, it's slight, and might not show up at all in a shooting machine. There are a lot more variables when a human is holding the bow. The "Kitchen Sink" method of bow tuning by Nuts&Bolts involves splitting a single thread of bowstring material with relative consistency. A component of being able to do that relatively consistently is maintaining a consistent bow angle (ie a consistent bubble)


----------



## Lazarus

nestly said:


> b) If the bow's cant changes, so does the way it contacts the shooters hand, Inconsistent hand placement will result in inconsistent tuning. Alternately, the shooter might try to maintain the hand/bow relationship, but then rotating the hand as the bow cant angle changes results in the shooters elbow/shoulder position moving slightly.


Thank you nestly for pointing that out. I've followed this mess in hopes that someone would at some point say something that was relevant to actually shooting or setting up a bow. I've been pretty disappointed for the most part. 

The quoted text is pure gold. 

Taking it one step further, the bow/hand contact doesn't even have to change. You *can* adversely effect the system by twisting the wrist ever so slightly to obtain a perfectly level bubble no matter what your setup is. Which points to this; it's the INDIAN! <-----------<<< And ron, if you're reading this, THIS is the science of archery!


----------



## SonnyThomas

nestly said:


> All that ^^^^ PLUS the rear sight on a crossbow isn't restricted to the string. That's what makes sight alignment on a bow such a difficult nut to crack, we have very little control over the rear sight (peep) orientation. The only time the rear sight (peep) can be directly above the arrow and on the same plane as the arrows path is when the bow/bowstring is perfectly vertical.


Agree and don't agree to thinking or wording. Bow canted, peep, pin and arrow are all aligned, just at a angle. The arrow is going to rise, but rise in the direction to intersect the pin. Same difference if the bow were canted 90 degree left the arrow doesn't rise, but goes left to intersect the pin and therein the problem, gravity. That the arrow isn't rising the arrow must drop.


----------



## redman

What is the best way to set up target sight parallel to riser or with natural cant


----------



## glennx

redman said:


> What is the best way to set up target sight parallel to riser or with natural cant


 377 post and now this question?


----------



## nestly

The process of adjusting the sight would probably be better in a less technical thread (and a shorter one  ) To get you started, you might have a look here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=itNe55dFnRk&feature=youtu.be which only covers leveling the sight with the bow. To level for a natural cant, Do the 1st and 2nd axis as described, then go back and change the 1st axis so the bubble is in the middle when you're comfortable with your hold at full draw. BTW, you don't need the fancy tools, leveling the string or riser with a torpedo or carpenters level works just as well. So does holding the bow against a door jamb that you've verified as level/plumb.


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> I have another idea. If the path of the arrow is determined by cant angle then the arrow will always follow the cant, regardless of the distance. Of course, the greater the distance, the greater the POI error to the canted side. Since I can't really get comfortable with the pivot being the line of sight, I'd like to prove this out, one way or another, with a test. The test is simple. Sight in the canted, uncorrected bow at 80 yards and then shoot the bow at 15 yards with a sight and cant setting to match. If the pivot is actually the line of sight, the POI error will still favor the cant. If it is simply a sighting issue the POI should reverse... I think?
> 
> P.S. As you can see, I'm trying very hard to keep crow off my plate.


In the hypothesis above and pictured below with the actual test results, my contention was that if the canted bow/sight were set at 80 yards instead of where most people set their sights at short range it would change POI impact from right to left when set and shot at 15 yards. All I can say is cousin John would be proud!

Please note that the hypothesis was set up with a right cant and the actual test was performed with a left cant. What say you now?


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> In the hypothesis above and pictured below with the actual test results, my contention was that if the canted bow/sight were set at 80 yards instead of where most people set their sights at short range it would change POI impact from right to left when set and shot at 15 yards. All I can say is cousin John would be proud!
> 
> Please note that the hypothesis was set up with a right cant and the actual test was performed with a left cant. What say you now?


How the testing was performed:

The bow was setup with a severe left cant with bubble level to assure repeatability. 

Shot #1: The initial sight setting was 80 yards with the 2nd axis leveled shot from 4 yards at a vertical plumb line. The sight setting and POI were dead center. 
Shot #2: I then move the shooter back to 14 yards and reset the sight to 15 yards and leveled. With the bow sighted in on the vertical line and bubble level the POI moved right of center, not left of center which has been the consensus.

A second variation of the test would include setting the sight at 80 yards again, but with the bow un-canted and then cant the bow for the 15 yard shot. That will be the next phase.


----------



## nestly

Weather is beautiful, take the shooting machine outside. 

I suggest you work your way out to 80 rather than start at 80 because if I'm understanding your results correctly, you're bringing an arrow that's starting FAR RIGHT of center back to center in just 14yards (while it's still on the way "up"). I'm guessing it will land a couple feet LEFT when it's on it's way down at 80.


----------



## Rick!

The cardboard shows you chased the "80yd" POI back to the vertical line by moving the scope to the left. So, you moved the POI to the right.

Now when you shoot at "15 yards", the sights are biased for a right of center POI, keeping the same cant. Kinda like a walk-up tune. If you flip your process and look at it from short range to long range, the POI moved left at long range due to the left cant, which agrees with what most everyone has been saying and/or already experienced.

Now, plumb the bowstring and shoot again at 15 yards and put your bullet proof vest on as the arrow will curve around and hit you in the back.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> Weather is beautiful, take the shooting machine outside.
> 
> I suggest you work your way out to 80 rather than start at 80 because if I'm understanding your results correctly, you're bringing an arrow that's starting FAR RIGHT of center back to center in just 14yards (while it's still on the way "up"). I'm guessing it will land a couple feet LEFT when it's on it's way down at 80.


I've had enough experience with shooting both my bow and my shooting machine at long and short distances to know there would be no change. Are you suggesting that the arrow that is still going up will change direction and go left on the way down? I hope not. I'm thinking you are not understanding the test. Perhaps you might want to duplicate it in your cad program. I assure you the results will be the same. 



Rick! said:


> The cardboard shows you chased the "80yd" POI back to the vertical line by moving the scope to the left. So, you moved the POI to the right.
> 
> Now when you shoot at "15 yards", the sights are biased for a right of center POI, keeping the same cant. Kinda like a walk-up tune. If you flip your process and look at it from short range to long range, the POI moved left at long range due to the left cant, which agrees with what most everyone has been saying and/or already experienced.
> 
> Now, plumb the bowstring and shoot again at 15 yards and put your bullet proof vest on as the arrow will curve around and hit you in the back.


Actually the cardboard shows nothing of the sort. The holes were the result of me sighting in the canted bow at 4 yards with the 80 yard sight setting. The 15 yard shot was shot with the exact same cant as the 80 yard setting with the sight reset to 15 yards and shot from 15 yards. Both shots were sighted directly on the plumb line. And you and I both know arrows fly on a straight arc and are pulled straight down by gravity along that arc. Now, phase 2 of my test will be first sighted in again at 4 yards with the 80 yard sight setting. The difference will be that the bow will not be canted. The 14 yard shot will be canted to the left as in phase 1.


----------



## Sasquech

ELPC sir your illustration is exactly showing that the parallel lines if they are the riser and sight frame the sight will move right along the cant and will compensate for the right and left by moving the front sight right and left with the elevation . The second axis must be set to match the cant of the riser.


----------



## jim p

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=424454&p=3725069#post3725069

If you haven't seen this, it will be different.


----------



## Sasquech

We have been through this in detail through out this thread. We are well beyond that. Single distance will work just fine.period


----------



## jim p

I think that the peep sight moving to the side when the bow is canted will cause a problem when shooting different distances. If you had a peep sight that could be moved off to the correct side of the string, then you could shoot at any distance and have the arrow hit down the center.

I know that with my bow setup vertical, my arrows will hit off center if I cant the bow.

I am just going to keep things simple and keep my vertical setup.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> Are you suggesting that the arrow that is still going up will change direction and go left on the way down?


NO!



EPLC said:


> Perhaps you might want to duplicate it in your cad program.


No need. I already know what the three scenarios are for a canted bow that uses a front sight and peep sight.

1) The arrow starts to the side of the line-of-sight and moves farther and farther away from the line-of-sight as it travels away from the bow.
2) The arrow starts to the side of the line-of-sight and remains parallel to the line-of-sight, but offset to the side of the line-of-sight as it travels away from the bow.
3) The arrow starts to the side of the line-of-sight and moves toward the line-of-sight as it travels away from the bow. If the arrow's path is not impeded, it will eventually cross the line-of-sight at one distance, and only one distance, then it will move increasingly farther away from the line-of-sight on the other side as it continues to travel away from the bow.


----------



## thawk

You said severe cant. Do you know how many degrees?


----------



## SonnyThomas

jim p said:


> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=424454&p=3725069#post3725069
> 
> If you haven't seen this, it will be different.


So Old Pro had a comfortable cant that he enjoyed and set his sight frame to compensate. The picture must not be square? Note the level bubble. It's dead center. Top of bow tilted right (black line). Sight frame is canted (red line). The green line being straight up and down.


----------



## EPLC

U


nestly said:


> NO!
> 
> 
> 
> No need. I already know what the three scenarios are for a canted bow that uses a front sight and peep sight.
> 
> 1) The arrow starts to the side of the line-of-sight and moves farther and farther away from the line-of-sight as it travels away from the bow.
> 2) The arrow starts to the side of the line-of-sight and remains parallel to the line-of-sight, but offset to the side of the line-of-sight as it travels away from the bow.
> 3) The arrow starts to the side of the line-of-sight and moves toward the line-of-sight as it travels away from the bow. If the arrow's path is not impeded, it will eventually cross the line-of-sight at one distance, and only one distance, then it will move increasingly farther away from the line-of-sight on the other side as it continues to travel away from the bow.


Ok, which of your 3 correlates with my test?


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> U
> Ok, which of your 3 correlates with my test?


*3)* Arrow starts to the right and crosses the line-of-sight relatively close to the bow (~14 yards)


----------



## SonnyThomas

Goofed up. I switched sight frames and didn't correct anything. Zeroed in at 15 and backed up. 20 seemed dead on. 25 yards and I had doubts. Tried 30 and 35 yards and my arrows were impacting right by about 2 to 2 1/2". Scratched my head. I wasn't watching my bubble due to it always being dead center. Did a fast check of second axis against the door jamb I knew level and sure enough the bubble was way off. So tomorrow I'll correct things. Today was the most I've shot and the repaired shoulder was getting tired....


----------



## [email protected]

nestly said:


> *3)* Arrow starts to the right and crosses the line-of-sight relatively close to the bow (~14 yards)
> 
> 3) The arrow starts to the side of the line-of-sight and moves toward the line-of-sight as it travels away from the bow. If the arrow's path is not impeded, it will eventually cross the line-of-sight at one distance, and only one distance, then it will move increasingly farther away from the line-of-sight on the other side as it continues to travel away from the bow.


Nestly,

At around 6:21 into the video it shows the bow canted the arrow following a straight path the target center. The line of sight crosses the trajectory path a short distance n front of the bow yet line of sight is still center target. 

At around 6:39 into the video it states that "the bow rotated around the arrow and the sights were adjusted accordingly". What exactly does this mean? In the CAD program, did you change the position of the front sight up/down left/right so there was an adjusted line of sight to the target center? 

I get that you're trying to show the bow cant doesn't matter when the arrow is frozen in the one position it will hit the target. What I don't get is the line of sight always pointing to the target center. 

If you change everything in the system around the arrow so the arrow hits target center, the sights will not be pointing at the target center as depicted in the video. The only time the front and rear sight create a line of sight to the target center is when the bow is plum vertical so the line of sight intersects the trajectory of the arrow in two places.


----------



## nestly

[email protected] said:


> At around 6:39 into the video it states that "the bow rotated around the arrow and the sights were adjusted accordingly". What exactly does this mean? In the CAD program, did you change the position of the front sight up/down left/right so there was an adjusted line of sight to the target center?


Yes, each time the bow is moved/rotated in the CAD model, a new line (green line) is drawn from the center of the peep to the target, then the front sight is moved so the aiming dot stays on that line. If it wasn't clear in the video that the front sight was being moved for each different bow position to keep the pin directly in-line with the peep and target, I apologize.


----------



## jim p

I agree.



SonnyThomas said:


> So Old Pro had a comfortable cant that he enjoyed and set his sight frame to compensate. The picture must not be square? Note the level bubble. It's dead center. Top of bow tilted right (black line). Sight frame is canted (red line). The green line being straight up and down.


----------



## montigre

Why not just train your body to hold the bow vertically and set the sight accordingly instead of adjusting the set up for a natural cant. If it's a little off by the time you reach full draw, use your stabs to make that small correction and not your bow hand/wrist. In this situation you do not have to take into account the additional variables that had been introduced to the set up to compensate for a natural cant if shooting in a windy situation. You learn through exposure how much you have to bubble or level off to achieve the desired POI and shoot the shot. 

Adjusting for the cant is a viable solution to mask a form flaw, so why not just correct the form flaw without making it so complicated?


----------



## jim p

Exactly.

After reading this thread well not all of it, I am convinced that the string on the bow needs to be vertical when shot. This keeps the peep directly above the arc of the arrows flight.


----------



## EPLC

For those that are concerned about peep movement. If the "cant remains constant" throughout the sighting, aiming and shooting process, the peep position remains constant and the pin is the variable. Btw, moving the sight bar to 90 degrees in my model should remove the error and result in both the 80 and the 15 yard shot hitting the plumb line. I'll post the results.


----------



## nestly

montigre said:


> Why not just train your body to hold the bow vertically and set the sight accordingly instead of adjusting the set up for a natural cant. If it's a little off by the time you reach full draw, use your stabs to make that small correction and not your bow hand/wrist. In this situation you do not have to take into account the additional variables that had been introduced to the set up to compensate for a natural cant if shooting in a windy situation. You learn through exposure how much you have to bubble or level off to achieve the desired POI and shoot the shot.
> 
> Adjusting for the cant is a viable solution to mask a form flaw, so why not just correct the form flaw without making it so complicated?


I agree that canting a bow with sights is basically a form flaw. Sure, it may take some effort and training to hold the bow level/plumb, but so does standing upright instead of slouching. Larry Wise wrote an article called "Setting up Sights for Top Accuracy" where he said archers should training to keep the bow level/plumb. However he did make an allowance for some archers, who even after training long and hard, might not be able to overcome it. He mentions that he himself has a shoulder injury that shows up as a tendency to cant the bow. He makes it clear that the bow should be held plumb for greatest accuracy, but does make allowances for up to 5 degrees for those who cannot, for whatever reason, keep the bow perfectly plumb.

IMO, there is no good reason to cant a bow with sights unless it makes you so uncomfortable that it's detrimental to your accuracy. When the eye and/or peep, and/or sight pin are not on the same plane as the path of the arrow, everything gets more complicated than it needs to be.


----------



## erdman41

Or just shoot whatever gives you the best hold. 

Make sure second and third axis are correct and stop worrying about sight misalignments that can only be measured on paper with a calculator.


----------



## SonnyThomas

jim p said:


> Exactly.
> 
> After reading this thread well not all of it, I am convinced that the string on the bow needs to be vertical when shot. This keeps the peep directly above the arc of the arrows flight.


My single cam Hoyt UltraTec, the second axis of the sight is set to the string. Bow string is dead center between the limbs at the top wheel and a bit left at the bottom cam. Just measured it, 3/16" left. The unseen canted bow


----------



## cbrunson

erdman41 said:


> Or just shoot whatever gives you the best hold.
> 
> Make sure second and third axis are correct and stop worrying about sight misalignments that can only be measured on paper with a calculator.


And chances are if you can actually shoot well enough for it to matter, you will fine tune those adjustments based on the actual performance of your bow, outside, shooting it.


----------



## EPLC

cbrunson said:


> And chances are if you can actually shoot well enough for it to matter, you will fine tune those adjustments based on the actual performance of your bow, outside, shooting it.





erdman41 said:


> Or just shoot whatever gives you the best hold.
> 
> Make sure second and third axis are correct and stop worrying about sight misalignments that can only be measured on paper with a calculator.



Hmmm... and here we are at page 17. The thread was started to discuss sighting options of a canted bow, its feasibility, does it work, etc. While there have been several bunny trails, I believe for the most part we have done this...


----------



## montigre

EPLC said:


> Hmmm... and here we are at page 17. The thread was started to discuss sighting options of a canted bow, its feasibility, does it work, etc. While there have been several bunny trails, I believe for the most part we have done this...


Yes, that's my point....17 pages to discuss something that really should not be occurring (barring some physical limitation) in the first place. If you're using a sight on your bow, just learn to hold the bow plumb without all the complicated diagrams and mathmetical formulae to correct for a basic form flaw. 

It's just shooting a bow...and does not need to be made into an advanced engineering project.... :wink:
.


----------



## Padgett

I wouldn't have cared if this thread had taken 50 pages of debate, the fact that I was able to learn something from it was way worth the time spent reading and going over the things in it. Most of the information did nothing for me and in many ways reinforced my beliefs that shooting with a natural cant was equally accurate as a perfectly vertical bow. 

This setting of the first axis so that your bow is perfectly vertical isn't just for the elite shooter by simply doing this a average guy in his back yard can eliminate weird left and right issues that he fights with setting up his hunting bow. The more of us that exist that can lead people in a solid bow setup from good arrow flight to sight setup the more people can enjoy their shooting instead of fighting with it. I know that I have personally told buddies and other people here on archery talk that setting a bow to their natural cant was perfectly acceptable and equally accurate and I was simply wrong. So not only did my own shooting suffer but my advice to other people on this subject caused other people to suffer. I don't want to be that guy.


----------



## EPLC

montigre said:


> Yes, that's my point....17 pages to discuss something that really should not be occurring (barring some physical limitation) in the first place. If you're using a sight on your bow, just learn to hold the bow plumb without all the complicated diagrams and mathmetical formulae to correct for a basic form flaw.
> 
> It's just shooting a bow...and does not need to be made into an advanced engineering project.... :wink:
> .


To some it's just shooting a bow, which is fine, but for others the detail and mechanics are just as important. I for one am having fun with this. Not everyone has perfect form and cant is a common issue with armatures and professionals alike. I shoot with a natural cant and use an offset first axis. Several Pros have stated that sight offset is a method they use as well. There are a lot of opinions as to whether or not this is a feasible effort. I intend on testing this out until a clear and definitive answer is obvious... one way or another. For those that consider this a waste of time fine, nobody is forcing you to read it.


----------



## Padgett

I will remind you guys that this is a huge problem for a unknown 3d shooter like me. We keep talking about how much the arrow will hit off to the side when you cant the bow a full bubble and you know the perfect distance. Well how about that shot where you guess 4 yards hot and now your canted bow is moving the point of impact at a angle 4 yards hot and off to the side even worse. I think I mentioned this on a earlier page but it totally makes sense now because I am left handed and I set my bow up with a slightly left cant for the last few years. so it always seemed like at longer distances I was hitting a little left but I never did understand on a 39 yard target that I guessed to be 43 or 44 yards by mistake why my arrow would hit high left even though I had made a really good shot holding perfect on the spot. I totally understood that I had over judged the distance and should be 4 or 5 inches high and out the top of the 10 ring but why in the crap is my arrow over there 3 inches to the left also. It should have been straight above the 12 ring. I always just assumed that I had not realized that I had jerked a little or something.

Now when I am guessing within a yard most of the day and I am nibbling at the 12 ring like I usually do then my arrows would be on the right edge or left edge of the 12 ring and the problem wasn't really noticable. But what I do think when I look back is the hundreds of arrows that were 1/16 from being a 12 in the last two years of my 3d tournaments that would have made me a asa champion and there are so many that only needed a little something and I would have been shooting 15 twelves for the weekend instead of just 8 or 9 of them. This is totally something that I wish had been different in my setup.


----------



## Padgett

Here is a good example of where things balance out as far as scoring.

Lets assume that I checked my windage at 35 yards with a vertical piece of tape on the target the day before and put some clicks in the sight to get it hitting the tape perfectly.

1.Low back left 12 ring on a 43 yard shot, lets say that I am aiming dead on but my shot breaks as the pin is on the connector area. With my slightly canted left bow it is going to hit a little left of the pin when the shot broke and I end up hitting a 12 dead on thinking that I made a perfect shot when in fact I didn't my hinge fired when the pin was on the connector but I don't even realize it.

2. Next shot is a 46 yard shot with a low back right 12 ring and this time my hinge fires when I am also on the connector but it is on the left edge at 11 oclock and I hit a 1/8 inch off the connector for a safe 10 in the ibo area.

3. Low back left on this 41 yard shot and this time my hinge breaks on the 9 oclock area of the 12 ring and I shoot out of the 10 ring by a 1/8 inch to the left and I get a 8.

Now in all reality on these three shots I nailed the distances within a half yard and should have gotten a 12 on each of them because I executed awesome shots and my pin was on the edge of the 12 rings each time but I only got one 12 which was a solid one but I dropped 6 total points that I should have gotten because of the natural cant issue. I leave those three targets thinking that I just didn't perform when in fact I did my job of executing good shots and judging the targets but my choice in bow setup two years before is costing me fractions of inches that I don't have to spare in asa 3d.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, rant, rave and applaud, but when I returned to archery I came from competing with firearms, shotgun, rifle and pistol. Guns have to vertical to have the greatest accuracy. Just made since my bow had to be vertical. Hence, all of this is just so much....something not worthy of worrying about.

I know about cant from Trap shooting. You have cast on or off of the shotgun stock. Look at right handed shotgun and the stock is slightly running at angle right to the receiver and barrel. It's just the opposite for a left handed person. Ever so often a left hand shotgun gets out of the factory with a right handed stock. Not all that rare is for a stock to be straight. The wrong cast will give the shotgun cant. Fortunately I had one of the best stock and foreman makers around (mainly shotguns, but would take on a rifle and he's great here also). LH has been in the craft since after WWII. LH corrected a few of my shotguns and two rifles. Look around. There are shotguns for deer hunting and the comb made to "cheek" right into the sights. Same for shotguns and rifles with scopes, the comb extra high.
LH once stood behind to figure out just how far I was off shooting right and left clays. I was behind right clays and chewing off the front of the left going away clay. So a bit of improvised shimming and I was grinding targets regardless of left, right or in between. Later, LH adjusted the cast and I was good to go. 

Years back there were Try Stocks for single and double barrel shotguns. This was to fit the stock and shotgun to the person. Dimensions were taken from the Try gun/stock and a new stock was made. Today, there are some shotgun manufacturers make shotguns with Try Stocks, cast, length, comb and butt plate all adjustable. How about that, a gun made to fit a person just like a bow should be to fitted a person.....


----------



## EPLC

Because my original hypothesis was pictured with a right cant and my testing was done with a left cant I wanted to remove any confusion this may have caused. My intention now is to perform the same test with the sight bar adjusted to 90 degrees to offset the left cant. I will once again sight in at 80 yards and shoot one arrow (actually at 4 yards) and then move back to 14 yards, adjust the sight, aim and shoot. I'm betting that both arrows will hit the plumb line.


----------



## nestly

montigre said:


> just learn to hold the bow plumb without all the complicated diagrams and mathmetical formulae to correct for a basic form flaw.
> 
> It's just shooting a bow...and does not need to be made into an advanced engineering project.... :wink:
> .


I'm going to agree with you about learning to hold the bow plumb, but I think the discussion, simulation, mathematical equations, and field testing are a good thing. It wasn't that long ago that target bowsights didn't even have 3rd axis adjustments. (early to mid 90's) It wasn't because the same problems didn't exist back then, they just didn't realize that the bubble was "lying to them" and was causing left and right misses when shooting uphill and down hill. Someone figure it out, and invariably someone said the whole 3rd axis thing was hogwash. Today, we all know how important 3rd axis is... not because we all got "smarter" but because someone back in the 90's made a point of bucking what was then accepted as "common knowledge". 

I'm fascinated with the mechanics of archery. The best way to learn something is to work through it... that's what we're doing here. It may be "old news" to some, perhaps there's been nothing said in this topic that they didn't already know, but relatively few archers, (even competitive archers) really understand the relationship between canting, sight alignment, and POI.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> I will once again sight in at 80 yards and shoot one arrow (actually at 4 yards) and then move back to 14 yards, adjust the sight, aim and shoot. I'm betting that both arrows will hit the plumb line.


You can't simulate 80 yards by shooting at a closer distance It's not like using the same elevation setting on the moveable to shoot 4 yards and 80 yards. You can do it in the vertical because the arrow starts out below the line of sight, travels upward through the line of sight (4 yards), and then gravity bends the direction the arrow is going so it again crosses the line of sight at 80 on the way down. Doesn't work the same for windage. If the arrow starts out left of the line of sight,you can certainly make the arrow hit the line of sight at 4 yds using the 80 pin, but it's going to be headed "right", and it's just gonna keep going right, there's nothing that's going to bring it "back" to the line of sight the way gravity does in the vertical path.


----------



## EPLC

My next test case should prove or disprove the 90 degree sight bar correction on a canted bow claim. Results to follow.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> You can't simulate 80 yards by shooting at a closer distance It's not like using the same elevation setting on the moveable to shoot 4 yards and 80 yards. You can do it in the vertical because the arrow starts out below the line of sight, travels upward through the line of sight (4 yards), and then gravity bends the direction the arrow is going so it again crosses the line of sight at 80 on the way down. Doesn't work the same for windage. If the arrow starts out left of the line of sight,you can certainly make the arrow hit the line of sight at 4 yds using the 80 pin, but it's going to be headed "right", and it's just gonna keep going right, there's nothing that's going to bring it "back" to the line of sight the way gravity does in the vertical path.


Actually you "can" within a reasonable degree of certainty. This isn't my first rodeo. While shooting at 80 yards is certainly more difficult, short range testing can and will provide a very good indication as to whether or not something works. What you are failing to see is that you only ran one test scenario in your cad program. That scenario tested a bow that was setup plumb, sighted in plumb and then shot with a cant. This introduced the error based on those setup parameters and was limited to that setup. What was not tested was a bow that was setup plumb and then sighted in while canted, which can and does happen in the real world. This scenario is different and produces different results. It's also the scenario that will prove or disprove the fix with regard to setting the sight bar to 90 degrees. When a bow that was setup plumb "is sighted in with a cant" you end up with the results that I posted, which is different from your model. You can accept the results or reject them, but they are what they are.

And it's becoming obvious you either don't understand, or haven't really looked at my test case.


----------



## nestly

I understand, I just think you're missing an important concept. That being that if an arrows path does not begin on a given plane, the path will never be on that plane. If and when you do long range testing to validate your short range results, you'll either discover it yourself... or you wont. No point me commenting on your test or methodology any further.


----------



## Sasquech

Elpc sorry but your 4 yard example is very likely catching the arrow as it crosses the sight plane shoot at 4 yards with a canted bow then with out adjusting anything move back as far as you can and shoot again I guarantee a canted bow will not impact the target at the same right and left position. Remember no sight adjustment you can aim higher to adjust for the increased drop but no adjustment to the sight mechanism at all then return and report your findings.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> I understand, I just think you're missing an important concept. That being that if an arrows path does not begin on a given plane, the path will never be on that plane. If and when you do long range testing to validate your short range results, you'll either discover it yourself... or you wont. No point me commenting on your test or methodology any further.


Ok, explain this. Why did my left canted bow shoot right in the last test? Also, my initial testing of the 90 degree sight bar fix was pretty close to dead on, actually the 14 yard shot was 1/8" to the right of the 80 yard setting shot. Even with this second test the left canted bow produced a second POI that was right of center, not left.


----------



## EPLC

Sasquech said:


> Elpc sorry but your 4 yard example is very likely catching the arrow as it crosses the sight plane shoot at 4 yards with a canted bow then with out adjusting anything move back as far as you can and shoot again I guarantee a canted bow will not impact the target at the same right and left position. Remember no sight adjustment you can aim higher to adjust for the increased drop but no adjustment to the sight mechanism at all then return and report your findings.


As far back as I can go is 14 yards. Dead center is dead center and right of dead center is right of dead center. To have right of center POI with a left canted bow seems to contradict what has been put out here. The fact is, a canted bow that is sighted in at long range will produce a POI error at shorter range settings that is opposite of the cant. In figure G above this right side POI error was about 2" from center. This was only 10 yards farther than the 4 yard shot. With regard to the peep being an issue. The peep is a constant when the bubble is level regardless if the bow is canted or not. This is simply taken care of with a front sight adjustment.

What you seem to be missing is that I'm not claiming that anyone is wrong. I'm claiming that there are more variables involved than have been put out here. Those variables do change things as this isn't as cut and dry as some would think.


----------



## sharkred7

Wow! I took a week off AT and this blew up! I didn't read through it all but got to the part about the arrow leaving a canted bow on some magical parabolic curve protractor example. With that logic then a cross bow bolt should move directly left and right as the bow is canted at a 90degree angle, right!??

What people are forgetting is in a canted bow the sight pin is still placed directly over the arrow and in line with GRAVITY which is the only thing other than drag that affects arrow flight.

So you can still get arrow flight that never misses left or right at any distance but also is never perfectly sighted in at ANY distance as the peep and pin will be on a parallel line that will be "off" the distance of the peeps cant off from 90 degrees over the arrow. OR you can be sighted dead on at one distance and be slightly left before the sighted in distance and slightly off right after that distance ( which would increase as the distance increases).

And as I said before, any one that could notice that little bit of difference would not even be having this conversation!!


----------



## Sasquech

Since you posted the same picture I assume you did not perform the zero adjustment experiment. I will perform it today. At 4 and 20+ yards and a steady 15 degree cant


----------



## EPLC

Sasquech said:


> Elpc sorry but your 4 yard example is very likely catching the arrow as it crosses the sight plane shoot at 4 yards with a canted bow then with out adjusting anything move back as far as you can and shoot again I guarantee a canted bow will not impact the target at the same right and left position. Remember no sight adjustment you can aim higher to adjust for the increased drop but no adjustment to the sight mechanism at all then return and report your findings.





Sasquech said:


> Since you posted the same picture I assume you did not perform the zero adjustment experiment. I will perform it today. At 4 and 20+ yards and a steady 15 degree cant


Figure G: For the 80 yard sight setting shot at 4 yards, the bubble was dead level, the scope housing was dead center in the peep, the pin was dead center to the plumb line and the POI ended up dead center to the plumb line. When I moved back to 14 yards I only adjusted the sight vertically upward to 15 yards, I did not adjust windage. The bow was then sighted with a level bubble in the shooter on the plumb line and fired. POI for the 14 yard shot was approximately 2" to the right of the plumb line with a bow that was canted left. In this test the bow and sight frame were parallel to each other and sighted in while canted at 4 yards with an 80 yard elevation setting. 

Figure H: The second test was performed exactly the same as the first... but the sight frame was adjusted to 90 degrees to ground. The result of that test was 2 arrows hitting the plumb line from both distances.


----------



## Sasquech

Once again words are not getting through set the sight at 80 stand at 4 yards shoot the string like you show in the pic with bow canted. Now NO ADJUSTMENT vertical or horizontal on the site no adjustment at all just back up and shoot again aim higher on the string to keep from going in the ground but NOT BY ADJUSTING the sight! This will show if the arrow is heading straight or off to the direction of the cant as we all represent.


----------



## EPLC

Sasquech said:


> Once again words are not getting through set the sight at 80 stand at 4 yards shoot the string like you show in the pic with bow canted. Now NO ADJUSTMENT vertical or horizontal on the site no adjustment at all just back up and shoot again aim higher on the string to keep from going in the ground but NOT BY ADJUSTING the sight! This will show if the arrow is heading straight or off to the direction of the cant as we all represent.


Moving the sight elevation is the whole point... and what goes on in the real world when shooting different distances... but I will do my best to perform your test case. I will not be able to move back much though as at 14 yards the 80 yard setting goes over the top of my target. I know this because I did it. Luckily my rag bag was on top of the target structure so my arrow came out unharmed.  Will 4 yards to 7 or 8 yards meet your requirement?


----------



## Sasquech

Prove the simple point first. Then we will move back to your example,


----------



## EPLC

Sasquech said:


> Prove the simple point first. Then we will move back to your example,


Since elevation will remain constant I'll use something mid-range to keep everything on the target butt. 
1. Sight in on plumb line at 4 yards with left cant. 
2. Move to 14 yards, aim at plumb line at shoot with same cant.


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> Since elevation will remain constant I'll use something mid-range to keep everything on the target butt.
> 1. Sight in on plumb line at 4 yards with left cant.
> 2. Move to 14 yards, aim at plumb line at shoot with same cant.


Test Results: 
1. Sighted the bow with left cant at 4 yards with 15 yard sight elevation and fired arrow. POI was dead center to plumb line.
2. Moved shooter to 14 yards and aimed at plumb line without making any sight adjustment. All aiming was performed with the shooting machine left/right adjustability. The bow position and cant remained constant. I initially shot 2 arrows to assure repeatability and make sure the shooter had settled in properly. 

14 yard shot number 1 went slightly right of the plumb line. Being the first shot after moving everything I assume this was in part due to the shooter not settled in properly.
14 yard shot #2 hit the plumb line just slightly to the right side. I estimate this was within 1/8" to being plumb with the 4 yard shot, but favoring the right side.

continued...


----------



## EPLC

Since both 14 yard shots were performed with a different arrow (black nock) then the 4 yard shot I decided to shoot the 4 yard arrow (orange nock) at 14 yards to assure absolute repeatability.

14 yard shot #3 hit the plumb line center but moved the plumb line slightly to the right (you have to hit absolutely perfect for it to stick in). I repeated this 2 more times with that arrow. POI slightly favored the right side of the plumb line and this could be due to this bow not being in 100% tune. As you can see in the last picture all 14 yard shots were either center or slightly right of the plumb line. (The low right shot was an existing hole and was not part of this test)


----------



## EPLC

Now if I understand you correctly, with a left cant and the POI centered from short distance the POI will move steadily left as you move back to longer distances. Based on my test results it would seem that this was not the result you were looking for. It is obvious that there are other factors and/or variables you and others are not accounting for.


----------



## EPLC

As mentioned this is a learning experience for me. What I have learned is there are several ways that cant can impact the POI. In the case of a bow that has been setup and sighted in with everything (bow/sight/string) plumb vertical, POI will generally follow the direction of the cant, regardless of elevation setting. Initial testing at short range seems to support this but I need to test this at long range to validate. What seems to contradict this is when a bow is sighted in with a cant and shot at different ranges without changing elevation, POI remains constant. That same test with elevation adjustments produces POI that simply follows the angle of the canted sight bar left AND right above or below the sighting in point. A left cant will produce a right side POI when sighted above the original aiming point and a right of center POI when below the original aiming point. 

This contradiction is the reason that a 90 degree sight bar setting WILL work on a canted bow, regardless of bow cant. The tests prove this out. The reason it works is that it does not matter that the string is canted. When the bubble is level, the peep, front sight and arrow are on the same vertical plane and that plane remains constant regardless of string cant. It does not matter because the arrow comes off the bow the same regardless of cant or not. The rest is simply sight setup and adjustment. The key is to have level bubble.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> When the bubble is level, *the peep, front sight and arrow are on the same vertical plane* and that plane remains constant regardless of string cant.


If you consider the image below, I believe you'll find that's incorrect. The relationship between the arrow rest, arrow nock, and the peep never change for any given bow regardless of front sight setting, target distance, or cant. 
The distance from the arrow rest to the nock (Distance "A") remains constant regardless of cant
The distance from the arrow rest to the peep (Distance "B") remains constant regardless of cant
The distance from the nock to the peep (Distance "C") remains constant regardless of cant.

The "triangle" defined by those 3 points (left side of the image below) is "fixed" when the bow is drawn. That triangle stays "with" the bow as it's pointed upward or downward, or if it's canted left or right. The right side of the image below show what happens to that "triangle" when the bow is canted as viewed from behind. The top of the red line is point B-C (the peep) the bottom of the red line is point A-B and A-C (the arrow) the peep is clearly not on the same *vertical plane *as the arrow when the bow is canted

The only time the peep and the arrow can be on the same *vertical plane* is when the string is plumb. Refer to post 390 for the 3 scenarios that when the peep is not directly above the arrow.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> If you consider the image below, I believe you'll find that's incorrect. The relationship between the arrow rest, arrow nock, and the peep never change for any given bow regardless of front sight setting, target distance, or cant.
> The distance from the arrow rest to the nock (Distance "A") remains constant regardless of cant
> The distance from the arrow rest to the peep (Distance "B") remains constant regardless of cant
> The distance from the nock to the peep (Distance "C") remains constant regardless of cant.
> 
> The "triangle" defined by those 3 points (left side of the image below) is "fixed" when the bow is drawn. That triangle stays "with" the bow as it's pointed upward or downward, or if it's canted left or right. The right side of the image below show what happens to that "triangle" when the bow is canted as viewed from behind. The top of the red line is point B-C (the peep) the bottom of the red line is point A-B and A-C (the arrow) the peep is clearly not on the same *vertical plane *as the arrow when the bow is canted
> 
> The only time the peep and the arrow can be on the same *vertical plane* is when the string is plumb. Refer to post 390 for the 3 scenarios that when the peep is not directly above the arrow.


I can't argue the pictures. I just know what my tests have produced. 

1. When the 1st axis (sight bar) is set to 90 degrees, whether the bow is canted or not, the arrow follows the sighted path at all distances... so long as the bubble remains constant. Test POI has remained a constant 90 degrees with these test cases. 
2. If a plumb bow (your middle example) is left canted (like your 2nd from the left example) and sighted in while canted, at say 50 yards, shorter then 50 yard shots will hit right of center and shots longer than 50 will hit left of center. Only the 50 yard shot will hit center. 
3. When a left canted bow is sighted in at very short yardage, moving back to longer yardage does "not" produce a left of center POI as was predicted. The test results found POI was centered or just slightly favoring the right side of center. 
4. When a bow is plumb as in your middle example and canted left and right as in your 1,2,4 & 5 examples the POI will follow the cant. My initial test indicated this is a valid claim but the left/right POI was so small that I can't absolutely validate this without further testing. I have no reason to doubt this though as each of the canted shots would have a non-level bubble. If bubble was not important we would not have them.


----------



## Sasquech

Actually given the math 4 to 14 yards the impact difference is likely about what you are getting about the string width. A 10 yard difference in the triangle and the cant consistent just moving back would expect to yield little or no measurable difference from human repeatability stand point.


----------



## Sasquech

nestly said:


> If you consider the image below, I believe you'll find that's incorrect. The relationship between the arrow rest, arrow nock, and the peep never change for any given bow regardless of front sight setting, target distance, or cant.
> The distance from the arrow rest to the nock (Distance "A") remains constant regardless of cant
> The distance from the arrow rest to the peep (Distance "B") remains constant regardless of cant
> The distance from the nock to the peep (Distance "C") remains constant regardless of cant.
> 
> The "triangle" defined by those 3 points (left side of the image below) is "fixed" when the bow is drawn. That triangle stays "with" the bow as it's pointed upward or downward, or if it's canted left or right. The right side of the image below show what happens to that "triangle" when the bow is canted as viewed from behind. The top of the red line is point B-C (the peep) the bottom of the red line is point A-B and A-C (the arrow) the peep is clearly not on the same *vertical plane *as the arrow when the bow is canted
> 
> The only time the peep and the arrow can be on the same *vertical plane* is when the string is plumb. Refer to post 390 for the 3 scenarios that when the peep is not directly above the arrow.


 

Thanks again nestly. This is the pic that shows the peep offset due to canting now your original video showed the arrow path I still don't understand where the disagreement is. I believe every illustration you have done is quite accurate and representative of the ops point namely me. The arrow heads off in the direction of the cant and beyond the sighted in point will impact in the direction of the cant inside the sighted in point it will impact to the opposite side. This is a small effect best seen by sighting in at 20and shot at say 65 or better 80. For folks that shoot say normal 3d distances averaging under 40 yards little effect if sighted in at the average distance. As most archers cannot shoot groups sufficiently small to measure the effect.


----------



## EPLC

Your test case did NOT produce the "expected" results. The arrows were either dead plumb or slightly right of plumb. With a left cant your expectation was that the arrow would follow the cant and impact left of the plumb line. As far as human error goes, my shooter is quite accurate and repeatable. I performed multiple iterations and found the results to be consistent with not one arrow to the side you predicted. 

When I tested the method of setting the sight to 90 degrees to correct a natural cant the test results supported this method. In addition, I actually shoot this way and find it to be successful. I believe the entire point of this thread was to disprove this method. 

I do not find the arrow follows the cant. It follows the direction it is pointed in. How the bow is tuned, sighted in and elevation setting chosen can and does effect where it is pointed, sometimes in the direction of the cant, sometimes not.

I believe the assumption that the arrow, scope and peep are in perfect alignment is flawed.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> I do not find the arrow follows the cant. It follows the direction it is pointed in..


I agree with that statement completely. 

However, when we consider the rear sight (peep) on a bow, it becomes obvious that the direction the arrow is "pointed" and the direction the sights are "pointed" change as a bow is canted. IMO, it's not surprising that your tests haven't shown a clear result. 
a) as far as I've been able to tell, all your testing has been done at distances that are considerably shorter than the distance archers usually shoot at 
b) as far as I can tell, you haven't defined "significant cant". I stated earlier how much a half a bubble is on my scope level (not all scope bubbles are created equal). I would not expect half a bubble on my setup to show clear results at 14 yards or less either. Even at 80, not every shooter would necessarily see a clear difference between plumb and half a bubble. 
c) canting a bow changes the tune, more so when held by a person, but also when shot from a machine. You might try shooting bare shafts through paper while the bow is canted left, plumb, and canted right if you're unconvinced about whether "significant" canting affects tune.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> I agree with that statement completely.
> 
> However, when we consider the rear sight (peep) on a bow, it becomes obvious that the direction the arrow is "pointed" and the direction the sights are "pointed" change as a bow is canted. IMO, it's not surprising that your tests haven't shown a clear result.
> a) as far as I've been able to tell, all your testing has been done at distances that are considerably shorter than the distance archers usually shoot at
> b) as far as I can tell, you haven't defined "significant cant". I stated earlier how much a half a bubble is on my scope level (not all scope bubbles are created equal). I would not expect half a bubble on my setup to show clear results at 14 yards or less either. Even at 80, not every shooter would necessarily see a clear difference between plumb and half a bubble.
> c) canting a bow changes the tune, more so when held by a person, but also when shot from a machine. You might try shooting bare shafts through paper while the bow is canted left, plumb, and canted right if you're unconvinced about whether "significant" canting affects tune.


A) While testing at longer distances would not be arguable, my short range testing has proven itself out over time to be quite accurate, especially with directional conclusions. I get a repeatable same arrow, same hole over and over. There can be no question that a POI to the right of center would not change direction and go left of center at longer distances. From a directional standpoint there is no valid argument. The POI did not favor the canted side unless the bow was perfectly plumb in the vertical and sighted in that way. With the same bow sighted in while canted, the POI was both right and left of center when adjusted to higher or lower elevations on the sight. The right of center POI on a left canted bow was at least 2", not some insignificant number. 
B) I have no way of measuring the actual cant. What I did was go a full bubble and then some. The level and/or cant is micro-adjustable with an adjustment screw. It is very repeatable. 
C) I have no argument here as we are in total agreement. I used two bows during the testing. The first bow I retuned after I started (see history of my tests) and actually noticed a slight difference in POI when tuned properly. While the findings/conclusions were not altered, they seemed to be more centered. Left/right POI centered better when canted left/right after the tune. Before the tune left cant produced a slight left POI and right cant hit center. After the retune this was a bow that I consider in very good tune with a center shot that is actually centered (I yoke tune from that point). The second bow wasn't in perfect tune but wasn't far off. I didn't mess with it because I was screwing around with the sight bar angles throughout the testing. The conclusion is that tuning can make a difference but not significant enough to change the basic conclusions. 

I do have one question for you. Do you believe that the canting issue can or cannot be resolved by setting the sight bar at 90 degrees? If I missed your position on this I apologize.


----------



## EPLC

sharkred7 said:


> You guys are making this way more difficult than it needs to be.
> 
> !. You CANNOT compare canting a rifle and a bow. With a rifle scope the scope is in a fixed position above the sight and there is not enough crosshair movement to bring the sight perpendicular to the gravitational force which is the only force acting on the projectile, (other than the negligible gyroscopic effect which is a non factor in archery. With a bow sight canted and LEVELED to the gravitational force the sight can be moved over the arrow, almost. If you are canting the bow and the peep sight is not directly over the arrow you can still have perfect left and right at all distance. A severe cant may move a peep only a 1/2 inch off the arrow resulting in a perpendicular line to the target off by 1/2 in at all distances. If you can tell you are off by a 1/2 at 50 or 70 meters you would not even be having this conversation.
> 
> 2. Practical use has proven all this and doesn't need to be complicated. Level your sight, sight in at short and long range, if your left and right drifts with a level bubble adjust your second axis. Simple as that
> 
> All these formulas and comparisons to rifle shooting is apple to oranges.
> 
> John


In a nutshell, my findings support this post.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> In the "gravity drop" picture, there are two sight housings. (the higher one appears to be black, the lower one appears to some shade of blue/gray) I only see one bowstring, and it's canted at the same angle as the bow, as would be expected. If there's a peep in the string anywhere above the arrow nock, the there would be a significant POI difference between using the upper and lower sight setting in the image if the bubble was kept level for both shots.


Both in testing and in actual shooting conditions, I find this to be incorrect.


----------



## nestly

EPLC said:


> I do have one question for you. Do you believe that the canting issue can or cannot be resolved by setting the sight bar at 90 degrees?.


No, there is no solution when the peep is not directly in-line with the arrow's path, as must be the case when the string is not plumb. Having said that, with a modest cant, the actual difference between sight alignment and actual POI may not be enough to be concerned about... certainly not if the arrow still lands in the highest scoring ring. Best case scenario is to sight in a canted bow at the average scoring distance so longer shots will impact slightly to one side of dead center, and short shots on the other side of dead center. Alternately, set the sights to be parallel, but offset from the arrow's path. With the "parallel" configuration, if the peep on a canted bow is 1/8" to the right of the arrow, you'd also set the front sight 1/8" to the right of the arrow. POI will be 1/8" to the left of the sights at every distance. Consider for a moment how many archers in the world are able to aim within 1/8" on a target, much less hit within 1/8" consistently? Greater cant angle would result in greater offset POI, and would certainly degrade scores if the bow was canted so the POI was consistently 1/2" or more left or right of the pin at every distance.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> No, there is no solution when the peep is not directly in-line with the arrow's path, as must be the case when the string is not plumb. Having said that, with a modest cant, the actual difference between sight alignment and actual POI may not be enough to be concerned about... certainly not if the arrow still lands in the highest scoring ring. Best case scenario is to sight in a canted bow at the average scoring distance so longer shots will impact slightly to one side of dead center, and short shots on the other side of dead center. Alternately, set the sights to be parallel, but offset from the arrow's path. With the "parallel" configuration, if the peep on a canted bow is 1/8" to the right of the arrow, you'd also set the front sight 1/8" to the right of the arrow. POI will be 1/8" to the left of the sights at every distance. Consider for a moment how many archers in the world are able to aim within 1/8" on a target, much less hit within 1/8" consistently? Greater cant angle would result in greater offset POI, and would certainly degrade scores if the bow was canted so the POI was consistently 1/2" or more left or right of the pin at every distance.


Based on your rejection, and knowing that the process actually does work, I have to conclude the peep being in line with the arrow is a red herring. While I can't say why, the peep offset cannot be a factor and/or your hypothesis is missing something.


----------



## nestly

It's not a hypothesis. The relationship between the arrow point, the arrow nock, the peep, and front sight are real and measurable. There is simply no solution that allows the peep and front sight on a bow to lie on the same plane as the arrow's path when the bow is canted. A plumb bob or level can be used to confirm whether the peep is or is not directly above the arrow when a bow is canted. Similarly, a plumb bob or level extending from the top limb to the bottom limb can be used to determine the exact amount of cant. Measure A and B dimensions (below) and the cant angle can be calculated using Trig, or physically measured with a protractor. For simplicity, I'd recommend using the axel-to-axel distance for "A" and the left/right offset of the axels while the bow is canted. The same string used to establish a vertical line on the target may be used as the "plumb bob" if you don't have access to a proper plumb bob or level.


----------



## Sasquech

Elpc my friend it is not an hypothesis it is fact. However many are tired of arguing the point I for one who started the thread as its own threading an attempt to provide it as a learning exercise have been extremely frustrated when folks have diagrammatically pointed out the root issue and apparently that being in contrast to your point of view. We have gone 445 posts trying to prove scientific fact. The only assumption I can make is that the base setups you are using do not follow the same set of standards that our rigs follow ie. Arrow rising as it leaves the rest hitting a balistic curve maximum half way to the target. If this setup fact we're in common then an arrow coming out of a sighted in un canted bow would impact in the direction of the cant. This is incontrovertible so given your intent at proving the rest of us incorrect I think it best we all end this line of discussion. There is plenty of information here for the interested to try for themselves and measure the result. The first video neatly posted should have ended this thread. Mi should have closed the thread back then.


----------



## EPLC

All the cad drawings and mathematical "facts" each of you have posted do not explain why these two test cases resulted in: 
1. A POI that is opposite of your claims and... 
2: The other which corrected the error, which each of you claim doesn't work. 

In the two test cases below the cant was the same, they were both sighted in the same and shot from the same distances (4 & 14 yards). The "only" difference was the angle of the sight bar. It's obvious the both of you are smart guys, but you're also obviously missing something. Now, only if that cad program could actually shoot some arrows...


----------



## EPLC

And...


----------



## Sasquech

No you don't look at your picture peep is in your bar sight scope is over the arrow the arrow and line of sight are not parallel.


----------



## nestly

Just pointing out the obvious....

I'm now thoroughly convinced that this about "winning" an arguement rather than understanding the dynamics canting has on sight setup and POI.... so I'm regrettably unsubscribing from this topic.


----------



## montigre

Haha, I alluded to that a couple of pages ago.....


----------



## EPLC

So, we have two very intelligent people posting up wads of pictures and cad drawings that provide proof positive, beyond any doubt, that you cannot set your sight at 90 degrees to correct a canting issue. I've actually shot quite a few over the past week or so to validate this. It does work. Not only does it work, but it would seem that the cant of the sight bar is what controls the POI left/right issues, not the string cant. 

For those that want to now poke fun, I don't care. My tests were performed honestly and openly for anyone to duplicate. The POI of the arrows speak for themselves.


----------



## Sasquech

All at less than 20 yards


----------



## EPLC

Sasquech said:


> All at less than 20 yards


Yes, this is true. And I'll stand by results.


----------



## EPLC

nestly said:


> Just pointing out the obvious....
> 
> I'm now thoroughly convinced that this about "winning" an arguement rather than understanding the dynamics canting has on sight setup and POI.... so I'm regrettably unsubscribing from this topic.


Another obvious observation: Your last example requires a significant windage adjustment to the right.


----------



## Mahly

I think this thread has about run it's course.
Unless someone has some ground breaking discovery, I think all that needs to be said on this thread has been.
I even had another reply (with graphic) that I wanted to post, but it seems pointless. I think we are beyond the point of changing minds already.
Lets let this one be.


----------



## SonnyThomas

No ground breaking discovery, just that proof is in the shooting and I'd like see that at real distances, like 15 yards and 80 yards. No more this and that until actual results are cut and dried....


----------



## EPLC

SonnyThomas said:


> No ground breaking discovery, just that proof is in the shooting and I'd like see that at real distances, like 15 yards and 80 yards. No more this and that until actual results are cut and dried....


Agreed. I would have gladly taken this outdoors already but currently have no vehicle to transport my shooter. It will be a while before I can actually test this out at distance. Perhaps there is someone else out there with a shooter that could run some tests at distance to prove or disprove the canted bow, sight bar at 90 degrees method.


----------



## francis

EPLC, I couldn't work out in my head at all how setting a bow level for cant wouldn't work, after seeing your test results its even going to be harder for me to see it now lol!


----------



## redman

For me when I have my target bow set up for natural can't I have more left and rights at longer range


----------



## EPLC

I forgot about this thread. I'll do some experimentation this summer after my time frees up again.


----------



## RCR_III

You're aligning the vertical rod of the sight to be perpendicular with the ground, a flat surface. That sight being perpendicular will force the scope to travel up and down in a vertical movement for different sight settings for distances. There's no left right variance this way. You put the bubble in the middle each time. Doesn't matter how the bow is canted. 

That's why bubbling when it's windy works. You're moving the bubble to a spot in the level and that's moving the arrow. You move the bubble to the same spot each time. Arrow follows. 

Just like if you adjusted the vertical bar for a cant in the bow.


----------



## EPLC

There are those that will draw pretty pictures proving this can't be done. I've shot using a more than moderate cant and was very successful.


----------



## RCR_III

EPLC said:


> There are those that will draw pretty pictures proving this can't be done. I've shot using a more than moderate cant and was very successful.


I have as well. I've maxed out the movement on the horizontal bar before to shoot my PCE and never had an issue.


----------



## Padgett

Tough call, I have been on both sides of this fence and over the years certain things just bothered me but right now at this point I am really confident in my final decisions when it comes to setting up a sight for a competition bow. 

1. We use front and rear bars for stabilization so there is no real reason to be forced to shoot with a natural cant, if there was no such thing as a rear bar then it might be a good choice instead of fighting with the bow but with our current choices it just isn't.

2. Putting a level on the bow string is no more difficult than putting it on the riser to do the first axis. So, why not?

3. Doing 3rd axis at full draw is just as easy as doing it in some independant off the bow tool so why not just do it on the bow?

We all spend 99% of our time trying to smooth out our shooting execution and dialing in the sight so that it can take care of us on the weekend, to me setting up a bow using some common sense can do nothing but take out the guesswork to certain types of our setup so that we can trust a bow to take care of us on that weekend tournament.


----------



## thawk

One sentence bothers me with padgetts #1
How can you be forced to shoot with something that is natural?

To me using a heavy side bar to level you out if you have a natural cant is forcing you to shoot straight. 

Great form is a goal of many, repeatable form is what is needed to be successful, IMO anything that is natural is more repeatable then something that is forced.

My sight was dead on this weekend at 101 yards, 88 yards and 4 yards and I still put a big shim behind the sight mounting block


----------



## Padgett

To my knowledge there is no bow out there that is balanced from left to right if it does not have a rear bar, the sight and the rest are mounted on the same side of the bow and they both cause the bow to want to lean that direction. So back in the day when there were no rear bars on a bow you had two choices, either shoot with the natural cant that the bow wanted to sit at or you fight that natural cant and keep the bow vertical. Right now with our target bows we have v bars and single rear bars and screw on weights and we can choose to add weight and change the angle of the rear bar and we can choose to shoot with a perfectly vertical bow or a canted bow. To me it is a choice and you will not have to fight the bow at all to with either choice. 

For those guys that have been shooting for a few decades and they came out of the generation of shooters that didn't have a rear bar on the bow and over the years accepted a natural cant I think many of these guys set up their current bow the same way they set up their old bow back in the day and they are just grandfathered in to that kind of setup.


----------



## Padgett

I have been working on things in this subject area of hitting dead on left and right this season, I actually took off my torque indicator and I shot the first two months of the season without it to see if it actually hurt me not having it on my bow. I have also been working on trying to learn how to deal with sun light coming in from different directions and how it changes my point of impact. 

In the last few years I have changed my setup a few times and I do believe that I benefitted a little when I made the choice to move away from shooting with a natural cant, I did shoot with one and was totally confident in that choice but the moment that I went back to a vertical setup I saw my windage issues really clean up mainly in getting the bow dead on. With the natural cant it seemed like a huge chore and something that I was trying to get right on a regular basis. 

With the torque indicator it was kind of the same effect as the switch away from shooting with natural cant, I can see the difference and it is subtle. Basically when I am shooting without a torque indicator I shoot some shots that I knew were freaking perfect executions where the pin was on the 12 ring when the bow fired and then the arrow hits 2 or 3 inches to the left or the right and I have no freaking idea why in the crap it is over there. When I am shooting with the torque indicator that simply doesn't happen, my arrow hits where it is supposed to and if I miss to the right my pin was over there when the shot broke.

The one thing that is puzzling me is the sun, right now I have my big block target mounted on my 4 wheeler and I actually shoot with it on the 4 wheeler. I live on a farm and have 4 different areas down by the river and in my yard to shoot and I just drive and park where I want my target to sit. Most of the time I move the 4 wheeler 3 times every shooting session so I get different looks and yardages. One thing I have been doing is parking where the sun is perfectly on my left during some of my sessions and I shoot for 10 minutes or so and I am noticing that my arrows will hit 1 to 2 inches left and then when I switch spots and put the 4 wheeler where I was shooting and I shoot from where the 4 wheeler was I instantly hit on the right 1 to 2 inches. To me this is the biggest effect that I have seen out of the three areas when I compare natural cant to the torque indicator and sun light, Why? Because when the sun is doing this it happens every stinking shot over and over. My problem is I can't figure out how to apply it to 3d shooting because most of the time we are shooting in the woods and mid day when the sun is above us, in 3d when it does get you it may only happen one shot on the edge of the course where a target is in a field and the sun is actually hitting at that angle or your shooting stake is out in the open and the target is in the tunnel.


----------



## RCR_III

Padgett said:


> To my knowledge there is no bow out there that is balanced from left to right if it does not have a rear bar, the sight and the rest are mounted on the same side of the bow and they both cause the bow to want to lean that direction. So back in the day when there were no rear bars on a bow you had two choices, either shoot with the natural cant that the bow wanted to sit at or you fight that natural cant and keep the bow vertical. Right now with our target bows we have v bars and single rear bars and screw on weights and we can choose to add weight and change the angle of the rear bar and we can choose to shoot with a perfectly vertical bow or a canted bow. To me it is a choice and you will not have to fight the bow at all to with either choice.
> 
> For those guys that have been shooting for a few decades and they came out of the generation of shooters that didn't have a rear bar on the bow and over the years accepted a natural cant I think many of these guys set up their current bow the same way they set up their old bow back in the day and they are just grandfathered in to that kind of setup.


Hoyt Hyper Edge. Bow sits neutral and balanced without stabilizers.


----------



## RCR_III

Padgett said:


> Tough call, I have been on both sides of this fence and over the years certain things just bothered me but right now at this point I am really confident in my final decisions when it comes to setting up a sight for a competition bow.
> 
> 1. We use front and rear bars for stabilization so there is no real reason to be forced to shoot with a natural cant, if there was no such thing as a rear bar then it might be a good choice instead of fighting with the bow but with our current choices it just isn't.
> 
> 2. Putting a level on the bow string is no more difficult than putting it on the riser to do the first axis. So, why not?
> 
> 3. Doing 3rd axis at full draw is just as easy as doing it in some independant off the bow tool so why not just do it on the bow?
> 
> We all spend 99% of our time trying to smooth out our shooting execution and dialing in the sight so that it can take care of us on the weekend, to me setting up a bow using some common sense can do nothing but take out the guesswork to certain types of our setup so that we can trust a bow to take care of us on that weekend tournament.



To look at this in a different way, because I agree with thawk, how can you be forced to shoot with something if it's natural. 

My PCE when I had it, I shot it with a natural cant to the bow. It's the only bow I've had that was this way and I have no clue what made it the special one. If I added weight to the side rod, or swung it out to the left, it became so off balanced I couldn't shoot well with it. So I left it where I grouped best and adjusted the 1st axis on my sight and made everything work together.


----------



## RCR_III

Padgett said:


> I have been working on things in this subject area of hitting dead on left and right this season, I actually took off my torque indicator and I shot the first two months of the season without it to see if it actually hurt me not having it on my bow. I have also been working on trying to learn how to deal with sun light coming in from different directions and how it changes my point of impact.
> 
> In the last few years I have changed my setup a few times and I do believe that I benefitted a little when I made the choice to move away from shooting with a natural cant, I did shoot with one and was totally confident in that choice but the moment that I went back to a vertical setup I saw my windage issues really clean up mainly in getting the bow dead on. With the natural cant it seemed like a huge chore and something that I was trying to get right on a regular basis.
> 
> With the torque indicator it was kind of the same effect as the switch away from shooting with natural cant, I can see the difference and it is subtle. Basically when I am shooting without a torque indicator I shoot some shots that I knew were freaking perfect executions where the pin was on the 12 ring when the bow fired and then the arrow hits 2 or 3 inches to the left or the right and I have no freaking idea why in the crap it is over there. When I am shooting with the torque indicator that simply doesn't happen, my arrow hits where it is supposed to and if I miss to the right my pin was over there when the shot broke.
> 
> The one thing that is puzzling me is the sun, right now I have my big block target mounted on my 4 wheeler and I actually shoot with it on the 4 wheeler. I live on a farm and have 4 different areas down by the river and in my yard to shoot and I just drive and park where I want my target to sit. Most of the time I move the 4 wheeler 3 times every shooting session so I get different looks and yardages. One thing I have been doing is parking where the sun is perfectly on my left during some of my sessions and I shoot for 10 minutes or so and I am noticing that my arrows will hit 1 to 2 inches left and then when I switch spots and put the 4 wheeler where I was shooting and I shoot from where the 4 wheeler was I instantly hit on the right 1 to 2 inches. To me this is the biggest effect that I have seen out of the three areas when I compare natural cant to the torque indicator and sun light, Why? Because when the sun is doing this it happens every stinking shot over and over. My problem is I can't figure out how to apply it to 3d shooting because most of the time we are shooting in the woods and mid day when the sun is above us, in 3d when it does get you it may only happen one shot on the edge of the course where a target is in a field and the sun is actually hitting at that angle or your shooting stake is out in the open and the target is in the tunnel.


That's why it helps to practice in situations you'll see on the range. Which you're doing. It's perceptions of the eye and how the sun's reflection in your scope is changing it. Learning to deal with it and adjust for it helps. It may always be an issue, but if you go to a stake and know the sun is coming from x angle, then you can adjust where you hold to compensate. Even if you have to play it safe to 10 the target. 

The natural cant issue being hard to replicate tells me it was natural. That there was torque in the grip and muscles causing the cant. When you involve muscles into your shot, you have to replicate the muscles exactly shot to shot. If it was a natural cant from just how the hand went into the grip and how you held the bow at full draw then it would be your body's resting area and it would be repeatable. That's why you see an improvement when you moved away from it. 

(all postings copyrighted by RCR_III ;-) )


----------



## dk_ace1

Padgett said:


> To my knowledge there is no bow out there that is balanced from left to right if it does not have a rear bar, the sight and the rest are mounted on the same side of the bow and they both cause the bow to want to lean that direction. So back in the day when there were no rear bars on a bow you had two choices, either shoot with the natural cant that the bow wanted to sit at or you fight that natural cant and keep the bow vertical. Right now with our target bows we have v bars and single rear bars and screw on weights and we can choose to add weight and change the angle of the rear bar and we can choose to shoot with a perfectly vertical bow or a canted bow. To me it is a choice and you will not have to fight the bow at all to with either choice.
> 
> For those guys that have been shooting for a few decades and they came out of the generation of shooters that didn't have a rear bar on the bow and over the years accepted a natural cant I think many of these guys set up their current bow the same way they set up their old bow back in the day and they are just grandfathered in to that kind of setup.


My new PSE Beast EXT does. I shot it without stabs the other day and noticed this. I was surprised, never had a bow that did that before. I understand what you're saying and I don't know how they designed it to achieve this, but at my specs the bow is balanced left/right with no stabilizers.

D


----------



## Padgett

The beast is a cool bow, I saw it in the bow shop when it first came out and it has a really good look to it. I bet that the bows that are balancing vertical without any stabs on them are doing it because grip for some reason really fits your grip of a bow just right. Just a combination of a bow and its variables matching up to the shooters inputs just right. Which is nice, to me though until I bolt everything on my bow and get it up to weight I don't care about how it feels as a bare bow. I see tons of guys mainly hunters only that pick up a bare bow and make decisions on how good it is on a shooting range, I want my stuff on the bow and then feel how it aims and feels.

Sergio won vegas without a rear bar this year, I do like his little weights screwed onto the lower portion of the bow.


----------



## Padgett

I have been trying to think about my natural cant comment that a couple of you brought up, Shawn Greathouse is the guy that I stood in the asa booth area and had a good conversation about setting up a sight with natural cant. Then I watched the hamskea videos with Gillingham and I talked to him at a asa also later that summer, I believe it was 2011. I finally decided to accept what they talked about and I decided to shoot with my natural cant so I took off my stabilizers on my bowtech specialist and I shot a few shots and instantly noticed it wanting to lean so i closed my eyes and allowed it to just feel really good in my hands and I opened my eyes and the bubble was off center. I then changed my first axis for a few more shots with my eyes closed until when I opened them the bubble was centered. Again this setting of the first axis was done without my stabilizers on the bow. 

Then I put my stabs on the bow and i moved the rear stab angle until I could come to anchor and the bubble was centered, basically I felt like I "FORCED" my bow to accept the canted setup.


----------



## Padgett

When you read my archery stuff you will mostly see that I am a mental approach type guy when it comes to execution and tuning and grouping my arrows. Most people are surprised to find out that I am a math teacher because I don't push numbers into my arguments. This area though when it comes to sight setup really plays into my math background and geometry, I have always really enjoyed geometry and looking at it. When I look at a target sight and how it connects to the bow and how to get the most out of it I have always felt that a vertical bow where everything lines up on that vertical plane is the strongest decision. I totally admit that I was convinced to leave that behind for a few years but in the end I came right back. I enjoyed my shooting back then, just like I enjoy it now.


----------



## dk_ace1

Padgett said:


> The beast is a cool bow, I saw it in the bow shop when it first came out and it has a really good look to it. I bet that the bows that are balancing vertical without any stabs on them are doing it because grip for some reason really fits your grip of a bow just right. Just a combination of a bow and its variables matching up to the shooters inputs just right. Which is nice, to me though until I bolt everything on my bow and get it up to weight I don't care about how it feels as a bare bow. I see tons of guys mainly hunters only that pick up a bare bow and make decisions on how good it is on a shooting range, I want my stuff on the bow and then feel how it aims and feels.
> 
> Sergio won vegas without a rear bar this year, I do like his little weights screwed onto the lower portion of the bow.


With regard to the grip fitting me, I don't think the bow balanced naturally for me when I received it. In the process of tuning the bow, I used the new lateral adjustment system (LAS) to move the limb tip orientation to suit me better. After I had the bow nearly tuned up, I was shooting without stabs to make sure the stabs weren't covering up a problem I needed to address and that is when I noticed that it was balancing naturally for me. So somewhere in the tuning process (and I suspect it was the LAS adjustment) something changed that made the bow balance for me. 

YMMV, this isn't something I was trying to achieve with my tuning, just something that happened in the course of it.

D


----------



## oldpro888

Great read, great input. I read the entire thread. It took several pages before I decided it was actually in English. Lol. All I remember about geometry was the book was red.
I shot BHFS 30 years ago and we weren't allowed a bubble. I had a natural cant, my pins were different lengths, just a bit. The challenge was on side hills, the cant just added to the confusion. Shot pretty well considering, averaged 540s with that equipment on the NFAA field round. Would've loved to have a bubble, pin guard and archers mark back then.
Now 25 years as a FS shooter, I will adjust my sight in a steady wind. I do let down a lot with anything more than a 5 mph cross . Just don't like to shoot off the spot. Did I mention I hate shooting in the wind ?



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## clifflowe

Putting enough weight on the side bar to level my bubble torques my shoulder till it feels like it is going to dislocate. It is very uncomfortable and actually painful. So I shim my sight and shoot with a cant. I believe that it would be better to shoot without a cant but I can't.
Cliff


----------



## jim p

People who really need to cant the bow need bows made with canted grips that allow the string to be vertical above the arrow.

Pearson at one time made bows with canted grips.


----------



## thawk

jim p said:


> People who really need to cant the bow need bows made with canted grips that allow the string to be vertical above the arrow.
> 
> Pearson at one time made bows with canted grips.


It's been done, golden eagle did it years ago, too much cant for one, not enough for another, and way uncomfortable for those who don't have a natural cant. Needless to say, not a big seller

I also think the bowman accu riser had adjustments for cant as well as the swivel grip


----------



## 1tiger

thawk said:


> One sentence bothers me with padgetts #1
> How can you be forced to shoot with something that is natural?
> 
> To me using a heavy side bar to level you out if you have a natural cant is forcing you to shoot straight.
> 
> Great form is a goal of many, repeatable form is what is needed to be successful, IMO anything that is natural is more repeatable then something that is forced.
> 
> My sight was dead on this weekend at 101 yards, 88 yards and 4 yards and I still put a big shim behind the sight mounting block


I also had the same problem had to put way too much weight on my side bar just to get bubble level.it was hard for me to force the bubble level with that much weight on it in the end thanks to this guy who sent me a shim that now works great on my podium x I am shooting much better.


----------



## Padgett

Hey, I just saw this old thread. In metropolis I showed up with my old bowtech specialist and shot the superman week, for the last few weeks for some reason I have had to come to full draw and the bubble will be off to the left a little and I have to center it manually, the bow has been dead on so I just let it happen. 

So

On friday all day freaking long my peeping tom peep sight cut strands and I trimmed them and then it cut some more so that night I took it out and put in my old speciality peep. Well, I had to sight in my bow saturday morning before the asa shoot time of 11:30 and I decided to move the rear stab a little so the bubble centered without me having to manually do it. It only took a little change and it was centered, as far as my shooting it was fine. I got the bow sighted in and I did notice that my shot sequence was smoother because I didn't have to manually fix the bubble every shot.


----------



## redman

If I shoot my target bow with a cant will this work on the longer targets


----------



## boner

Here's an idea for some of you guys. Set your bow up for a natural cant, and if it doesn't work, go back dead level.


----------



## brtesite

set your sight up to be vertical . make sure all axis are set up . to shoot with a cant , make the bow revolve around the sight . It is to lenghty to write it up . Trust me , it does work . I don't know why a bumble bee flys , but it does.


----------



## EPLC

EPLC said:


> Agreed. I would have gladly taken this outdoors already but currently have no vehicle to transport my shooter. It will be a while before I can actually test this out at distance. Perhaps there is someone else out there with a shooter that could run some tests at distance to prove or disprove the canted bow, sight bar at 90 degrees method.


Back in September of 2015 I promised to test this out using my shooter. Well today I was at the range with my shooter for the first time since. My intention was to test out different arrows for grouping at 80 yards. After shooting at 80 for a while I remembered this debate and decided to prove or disprove it one way or another. After establishing a good left/right POI at 80 yards I moved the shooter to 30 yards, reset the sight to 30 and shot a couple rounds. I could find no impact on left/right POI with a bubble level canted bow.
The pictures below are of the canted sight, the 30 yard group and the 80 yard group. The same two arrows were shot at both distances, first the 80 then the 30. The left/right POI was consistently centered regardless of distance with bubble level.


----------



## EPLC

A little history on this very lengthy thread. There was much discussion on the effectiveness of offsetting the sight bar on a adjustable sight to compensate for a natural cant. Some claimed that offsetting the sight to vertical would not and could not work. There were charts and graphs, to prove/disprove the solution. 
I set my bow with the sight mounting block shimmed to about 3-4 degrees to compensate for my left leaning cant. With bubble level I shot from 80 yards and then from 30 yards. 
My test found that offsetting the sight is 100% effective to compensate for a natural cant. There were no left/right POI differences at any distance.


----------



## huteson2us2

SonnyThomas said:


> Can't a picture I wanted to post. One of my bows was off a bit so I put shims behind the sight mounting plate at the bottom. Just kept adding until the bubble was level with me at full draw. Never had to move anything else.


I do this all the time since about 2000 because the grip is not shaped for my hand anymore. I find that when I am at full draw, my bubble is off to the left. When I force the bow level, I will get misses to the left because the bow will return to the offset position during the shot. I also have had to use a back bar since about 2000 to try and level the bow at full draw. To fix this I level the sight. Then for my problem, I will put a thin shim on the bottom bolt of my sight at the mount, moving the sight to level at full draw. I still hit the spot from 3 yard to 100 yards because the sight was leveled to begin with before I shimmed.


----------

