# Fast Flight VS. 8125/8190??



## Harperman (Sep 3, 2006)

Anyone have any experience measuring the real world arrow speed differences between "Old School" Fast Flight string materials, , and the newer cutting edge string materials, such as 8125, or the newer 8190??....Apples to Apples testing??..Any info will be appreciated........Thanks in advance!.........Jim


----------



## deepsprayj (Nov 4, 2011)

I cant speak for chrono speeds but there is a noticeable difference between a fat and a skinny string. That applies to speed as well as noise and vibration. I actually dont like the added vibe and noise. I will take the minor drop in speed for the added foegiveness.

Shoot, work, shoot!


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

I suspect the reason you're not getting a lot of response is because nobody has made a FF string in quite a while. I found 8190 to be not as easy to work with as 8125. I thought it was just me, but in speaking with one of the best string makers in the country, he found getting exact lengths to be very tricky with 8190. I suppose some of it is just getting a feel for it. 

I found speed differences to be minor between 8125 and 8190. Certainly not enough to abandon all the spools of 8125 I have.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

In my testing, I found that 8190 < original Spectra based FF < 8125 < original TS1 (silicone waxed) < 8125G < Angel Majesty in terms of sheer velocity (20 strands, 0.7 twists/inch, 700# prestretch, 48 lbs, 365 grain arrow- all other variables normalized), however, the 8190 was far more temperature stable (-10 - +120F) than the others. Angel Majesty was still faster than any of these and only slightly less temperature stable compared to 8190. All tested materials were white except Majesty which was black. All were manually dewaxed using the garrotte method. 

Mind you we're talking ~4 FPS from the slowest to fastest. 

Side notes:
I've seen significant (2 fps or more) velocity variations among different colors of 8125. Colorant adds weight, variably according to color and wax volume (some have a high wax volume)
Majesty has the best mass stability over time due to the resin-based binder (no wax). Most of the others throw wax in use and this leads to minor changes in both length and mass. But Majesty generates more noise and vibration as does original TS1.
Twist rate matters, and can be custom dialed in for these materials but I had to eliminate it as a variable for obvious reasons. 

I have a comprehensive article on this overall subject in the international mags I write for (Bogensport, ARCO, Tir a L'arc, Japan Archery, Bow) coming up in the next couple months.

It's of some interest that some of the world's best shooters still use original FF. Many of these shooters (mostly KOR) tend to use what their coaches tell them to, and a lot of the top KOR coaches are very conservative about such matters.


----------



## knotdodger (Oct 2, 2005)

Do you guys think there is one string material more forgiving of
a bad release than another?? Or would that be a myth that I heard?


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

knotdodger said:


> Do you guys think there is one string material more forgiving of
> a bad release than another?? Or would that be a myth that I heard?


If only it were true. Some type of archery myth, I'm guessing.


----------



## wmt3rd (Oct 20, 2004)

Thanks GT. It is nice to see an actual answer to this type of question using proper controls so that the comparisons are meaningful.


----------



## Harperman (Sep 3, 2006)

>--gt--> said:


> In my testing, I found that 8190 < original Spectra based FF < 8125 < original TS1 (silicone waxed) < 8125G < Angel Majesty in terms of sheer velocity (20 strands, 0.7 twists/inch, 700# prestretch, 48 lbs, 365 grain arrow- all other variables normalized), however, the 8190 was far more temperature stable (-10 - +120F) than the others. Angel Majesty was still faster than any of these and only slightly less temperature stable compared to 8190. All tested materials were white except Majesty which was black. All were manually dewaxed using the garrotte method.
> 
> Mind you we're talking ~4 FPS from the slowest to fastest.
> 
> ...


>-gt->...........Thanks very much for this post!....Very informative, and it is great to see what actual apples to apples testing shows....I really appreciate it!...I'm shooting a 16 strand Fast Flight string on my Formula right now, and I like it very much, I am going to have a new string made, likely it will be made of 8125, just wondered if the newer stuff was really so much different than the original Fast Flight...I am a big fan of 452X for my compounds, and Your post answered alot of questions that I had about what string material to run on my recurves....Thanks again.....Take care!......Jim


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

Happy to help. By the way, it's certainly possible that with optimization for twist rate and strand count, there could be performance shifts among these materials that change the relative speeds. Not to mention a host of other variables. But for a level bench test this is what I have handy. Bottom line is they all perform well and in the end, it's getting what you want out of the material that matters. I did find 8190 to be agreeably quiet and very stable. It also builds out a bit larger- so the point is, a couple fewer strands might work fine with more velocity and still be very stable. For sure, it is great on compounds- but this was about recurves.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Good info there George.

How would you recommend the average recreational archer achieve a 700# pre-stretch? Is there a number of shots that will attain the same result?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Okay, I'll ask another way...

George, how critical do you feel the 700# pre-stretch is? I ask because when someone with your credentials mentions something like this, it would lead the average recreational archer to believe it's a necessary step in treating a string prior to use.

John


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

700# seems pretty excessive! 300-400# should be way more than enough. But why not.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Dissapointing George won't answer the question. I think it's a reasonable question. You can't throw "700# prestretch" out there on a board like this and not offer some kind of explanation.


----------



## DWAA Archer (Oct 14, 2011)

limbwalker said:


> Dissapointing George won't answer the question. I think it's a reasonable question. You can't throw "700# prestretch" out there on a board like this and not offer some kind of explanation.


John it must be a typo I suspect a 70# pre stretch would be enough to settle a string it's only to even out the strands after construction. On my strings thats about 4mm increase in length. when shooting 8125 it has a consistant 2mm brace height variation from stringing to the first dozen or so arrow being shot.


----------



## dwagoner (Sep 27, 2007)

I highly doubt he meant to say 70 pounds, that wont do much to stretch the material. if you ask the manufacturers they will tell you that 300 is more than enough, the max force during a shot is roughly 3x the amound of draw weight is what ive heard from them. BUT some do their own still.


----------



## dchan (Jun 29, 2004)

knotdodger said:


> Do you guys think there is one string material more forgiving of
> a bad release than another?? Or would that be a myth that I heard?


Actually a heavier string (or more strands) will be more forgiving just because you need to impart more energy to push that string sideways. it will also be slower, because of inertia. It's not a myth but the changes are minor.. Again, we tune to make equipment more forgiving to our errors. each person needs to find that balance between speed and forgiveness that works for them.


----------



## DWAA Archer (Oct 14, 2011)

dwagoner said:


> I highly doubt he meant to say 70 pounds, that wont do much to stretch the material. if you ask the manufacturers they will tell you that 300 is more than enough, the max force during a shot is roughly 3x the amound of draw weight is what ive heard from them. BUT some do their own still.


Everyone has their own way of doing things. With a newly made string on my bow I will draw it up a few times and then leave it on the bow for a few hours Then when I have shot 1000 arrows or 2 weeks worth of shooting I will consider it shot in and ready for competition. although after the first steps of drawing up and being left on the bow I have never observed any odd shots other then my own form errors.


----------



## NHSarcher (Oct 15, 2004)

*Comparisons*



>--gt--> said:


> In my testing, I found that 8190 < original Spectra based FF < 8125 < original TS1 (silicone waxed) < 8125G < Angel Majesty in terms of sheer velocity (20 strands, 0.7 twists/inch, 700# prestretch, 48 lbs, 365 grain arrow- all other variables normalized), however, the 8190 was far more temperature stable (-10 - +120F) than the others. Angel Majesty was still faster than any of these and only slightly less temperature stable compared to 8190. All tested materials were white except Majesty which was black. All were manually dewaxed using the garrotte method.
> 
> Mind you we're talking ~4 FPS from the slowest to fastest.
> 
> ...


George,

Have you done a similiar comparison with the above mentioned material and 452x?


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

No, I really don't like Vectran materials on recurves, and don't use them. I tested similar materials pretty extensively in the 90’s.

As for the prestretch, that is one of several methods to simulate a couple month's worth of break in with a normal 48- 50# bow at 70-90F with HMPE based materials. The only thing it doesn't do is fling wax (change mass) the way actual shooting does, but I deal with that with other means.


----------



## thac0 (Jul 26, 2012)

>--gt--> said:


> No, I really don't like Vectran materials on recurves, and don't use them. I tested similar materials pretty extensively in the 90’s.


Hi George,

Are those test results published? The shops here use 452x a lot so I am interested in hearing why you don't like 452x/Vectran. (Purely out of interest). I think it is more of a convenience thing for them, but if they can provide better advice I know they would take it. I'm newer to recurve and, via reading this forum, am looking at either Angel Majesty or 8125G for my next string.

Anyone else feel free to chime in as well.

Mike


----------

