# Hoyt Formula riser Vs. ILF/HDS



## zal (May 1, 2007)

Formula limbs are pretty average at best, so going with ILF makes more sense. GMX is a good one if you want a Hoyt. If you want to stick with US makers, PSE is another (better imo) option.


----------



## MaceHowling (Feb 26, 2012)

Is it safe to say that the riser is going to be a 1 time purchase? I will be changing the limbs a lot more than the riser, if I buy the correct riser to begin with, correct? Is there really that much difference between a Hoyt GMX and a Hoyt Horizon or excel? Should I get the more expensive riser or save on the riser and put the saved funds in upgrading the limbs later on down the road?


----------



## kshatriya (Jul 14, 2010)

I wouldn't call it a one time purchase, since as you shoot you will desire different things in a riser, but a good riser will go a long way, and most risers today are capable of amazing scores. However, at some point, you may want a different riser, either because you want more adjustments, more mounting holes in different locations, a better alignment system, or just a new toy to play with. 

As a beginner, I would get a decent riser that has the adjustments you will need in the foreseeable future, yet is not going to break the bank, because this way you can money for upgrading limbs etc.

I would spend on a quality sight, since those are really one time purchases.

Once you're committed, and decide on a preference for certain things, then perhaps it will be time to invest in a better riser.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

unless you are an equipment ho like i used to be--he he he!--the correct riser for your needs could very well be a one-time purchase...

i went thru many risers(more than 10) before finally deciding that the PSE X-factor is more than enough riser for my current and future olympic archery needs and i haven't bought any riser since--more than 6 years ago..(i DID get a spigarelli explorerII recently but that is a dedicated bare-bow riser)..

from the very beginning,i have always tried to get the best equipment i could afford which is a proper fit for me and using that guideline other equipment/accesories that could also be a one-time would be a sight, stabilizers, quivers,plunger, hard travel case, spotting scope and tripod... 

limbs, arrows, strings, and finger tabs are not one-time purchase stuff but i also try and get the best of those too..


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Risers can very well be a one-time purchase if you can afford a top of the line riser, or get lucky and get a good used one that you can afford.

Prime example is my 13 year-old Axis riser. It has served me well since 2003 and I still shoot it all the time. However, it's probably worn 7 or 8 different sets of limbs in that time. 

The Formula RX is a great riser. But the formula line locks you into Hoyt's limbs, which don't have quite the track record that W&W and Samick have IMO. The F3 limbs I've tried were fun to shoot, but slow. However, the are always improving, so maybe the F7's are as what W&W and Samick are offering now. I do like the fact Hoyt has made the formula system within reach of the "average" archer, so there are some less expensive options in that line...

My short list of "one time" risers are the PSE X-appeal, Hoyt Formula RX or GMX, W&W Inno or any of the premium Italian risers.

Any of those should serve you for ten years or more with care.

John


----------



## MaceHowling (Feb 26, 2012)

Hmm, sounds like Hoyt formula limbs are not very popular in this community. Should I even bother looking into the formula riser adapter to use ILF limbs o just get a good ILF riser and be done with it?


----------



## kshatriya (Jul 14, 2010)

The formula riser adapter to use ILF...
There are two that I know of, the Uukha ones and the one that's been posted on here designed by gotbentdoinker? . The posted one, I'm not sure if it ever made it to production, and I don't know much about the uukha, so I couldn't say how well it works with other limbs. If you are looking into ILF limbs, then I don't see a reason to use the Formula bows.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> If you are looking into ILF limbs, then I don't see a reason to use the Formula bows.


I agree.

A lot of this comes down to whether you want to shoot a Hoyt bow, or not. I've found that a lot of folks just want to shoot Hoyt, or be associated with that brand name. Some for good reasons, others couldn't tell you why. It gets a little bit like Nascar sometimes with brand loyalties surpassing reason. Unfortunately, Hoyt and to some extent, Mathews, has become a bit of "you're either with us, or you're again' us" mentality which is too bad.

If you aren't interested in paying for the premium limbs (F7) to go on the Formula riser, then I'd recommend you look at a good ILF compatible riser and just be done with it. Right now, my favorite 25" ILF riser is the PSE X-appeal with some of the Italian risers running a very close second. My favorite 27" ILF riser is probably the W&W Inno, but the Bernardini Luxor has served me well, and I've shot a 27" GMX and it's very good too.

The shooting qualities of the Formula RX riser are superb, but I'm not sure I'd want to be locked into their limbs just yet.

John


----------



## WMalinak (Dec 10, 2010)

It appears there are options for limbs on the RX riser!

When I decided to get back into OR, I "bought into" the Formula system and started with the Excel riser...since then, I've upgraded to the RX.
In that time I've also acquired 3 sets of Formula Excel limbs while building up my form (and weight) -- I've got sons thankful for the _hand-me-downs_!
However, next step puts me above Excel limit (40# or less) and I was also thinking about upping the quality.
I have a borrowed set of F3's and they are really smooth...I thought they'd be my next purchase.
But, this & related threads on AT give me pause.

I do NOT want to use an adapter (though I appreciate the engineering).
I live close enough to Sky and will learn a lot more about them soon (I called Jim a couple weeks ago...Sandy said he just left for a long hunting trip...hope he's back now).
Border limbs sound cool, too (great reviews here regarding speed/non-stacking and I like Sid's spirited posts), but they'll probably be impossible to demo.
Anything else to consider?

==>BillM


----------



## FijiGal (May 28, 2011)

I'm selling a formula rx riser - just thought I'd put that out there hehe


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

i have never tried the hoyt formula system but have had several hoyt ILF risers and they were all excellent...

i have gone thru 2 gold medalists, 3 elans, 4 matrixes and also a gamemaster hunting bow which has a hoyt tec riser and have heard very good things on the GMX also..

i just happened to feel the PSE X-factor fit me better primarily due to it's lighter mass weight..


----------



## Flehrad (Oct 27, 2009)

I've shot a bunch of risers, and I eventually found my way to the Formula RX last year. I really enjoyed shooting the bow, the response on it was really nice for me, coming off the back of using the Axis. I personally have no problem in using the formula limbs because, as Hoyt says, its a bow system, not a mish-mash of riser and limbs from different manufacturers. But, other companies are now making limbs to suit the formula PLS so you will probably find in the future there will be alternative options to the Hoyt limbs.

If you really are a beginner looking for your first riser, I would say to get something cheap, something second hand. You'll discover over time what you like, don't like, and what not, its quite rare for someone to get 1 riser and be forever with that riser until end of time.... lol. A monogamous riser relationship.... I would even go so far as to say, the new Cartel Fantom riser looks to be excellent value for its price with the design and quality from some reports and pictures of one from someone who bought it.... save some money now, and then you'll end up an equipment hoarder like the rest of us.....


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

Don't forget the Samicks, they can be 20% cheaper and if you can stand the painted finish, which will chip a bit, they will be very good bows for the money.

I've owned all major Samick risers and the current Xenotech is as good as any other. I actually switched from GMX to Xenotech as my main bow some time ago. Though I've gone back to ILF-retrofitted Axis. GMX I sold fairly quickly, but xenotech is still my backup bow.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

zal said:


> Though I've gone back to ILF-retrofitted Axis.


This appears to be an underground movement of people not afraid to take to their Axi with dremel or end mill.. Bring it on!


As for the formula limbs means Hoyt argument, that was dead the instant Border made them. Now compatible limbs are made by someone else too. 
And don't forget that these "unimpressive" Hoyt limbs in Formula risers now power some of the worlds top archers and have shot some incredible scores lately. 
Don't let this fact dissuade you from the validity of forum goers opinions though.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Whiz, you know the best archers are always going to shoot the best scores regardless of what brand bow they use. No need to get into a P$$ing contest about brands here once again... The equipment doesn't know who is shooting it.

While the F3 limbs I have to play with on my brother's Formula RX shoot very nice, they are at least 3 fps. slower than all my other limbs. Hoyt's website even says they are the "fastest limbs we've ever made..." ha, ha. 
Don't let that fact dissuade you though  

John


----------



## Blunt Arrow (Mar 2, 2006)

Best advise, go with ILF limb design. It give you the most choices. If you go with the RX riser your locked into Hoyt. At this point none of the other major companies have followed Hoyt's direction with there new riser and limbs. That tells me that none of the companies are sold on the design idea.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> Whiz, you know the best archers are always going to shoot the best scores regardless of what brand bow they use. No need to get into a P$$ing contest about brands here once again... The equipment doesn't know who is shooting it.
> 
> While the F3 limbs I have to play with on my brother's Formula RX shoot very nice, they are at least 3 fps. slower than all my other limbs. Hoyt's website even says they are the "fastest limbs we've ever made..." ha, ha.
> Don't let that fact dissuade you though
> ...


Oh, it's not a pissing contest. It's just a truthful one. Nobody ever said that speed was an accuracy factor. People like to quote differences in FPS, but nobody bothers to equate it to actual computed or real difference. Thus, it's a metric that doesn't mean anything, yet it's held up as meaningful. 

Arrow precision placement wins tournaments. FPS readings look good on chronographs. The fastest bow doesn't relate to tournament placings, so quoting speed is getting a bit redundant now. 
Essentially, I regard a statement of speed superiority as the inability to come up with any other superior examples of performance.

And just for Blunt arrow:

http://archery.ixpesports.nl/contents/en-uk/d1147_MK_Korea.html

Notice the Formula Fittings on two limbs on this page. They're not made by Hoyt. 

http://www.borderbows.com/working/ is another non Hoyt manufacturer of compatible limbs. 

How does this relate to the validity of the "Locked into Hoyt Limbs" statement?


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

Both of those options aren't available for mass market. MK Koreas will be at some point but not yet, as they are just items in the distributors' lists and no-one has seen them yet.

My guess will be that you will see a lot of Koreans shooting Formula riser with MK Korea limbs later this year. That's what they are doing with GMX+Veras atm.


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

MaceHowling said:


> which leads me to think that I should get ILF/HDS riser so that I can easily use limbs from other companies


I have just been through the same dilemma, GMX vs RX and after a lot of questions the GMX/ILF was the ways to go, especially for the $$ and the choice.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

whiz-Oz said:


> Arrow precision placement wins tournaments. FPS readings look good on chronographs. The fastest bow doesn't relate to tournament placings, so quoting speed is getting a bit redundant now.
> Essentially, I regard a statement of speed superiority as the inability to come up with any other superior examples of performance.


OK then, i'll take the bait.

Tell me then what qantifies a bow as stabel enough to place an arrow accurately on the target...
or is it the archer.

(i see this conversation turning into a roundabout)

If its the archer, then you might as well go back the superiority of a faster bow. since its the archer that wins the medals by arrow placement.

How high up this wall do you want to take this?

Since there is no information on vertical and horzontal string consistancy, then the only way to baffle people is by Purchasing wins with finacial might.
(manipulating the market with finacial might is illegal in europe BTW)

So do you think, if i could proove a improoved vertical and lateral NP path stability, with faster FPS do you think Brady would quit his contract with Hoyt to shoot this new bow?


----------



## Flehrad (Oct 27, 2009)

I don't think he was baiting you...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Whiz, 

Whatever. The best archers are going to win with whatever bow they bring into the match, period. You cannot tell me that the top archers are only there because of the bow they shoot. You know better than that. They shoot the bows they shoot BECAUSE they are the top archers, and they can draw the biggest contracts, not the other way around. 



> Thus, it's a metric that doesn't mean anything, yet it's held up as meaningful.


Indeed, even by one of the top archers who is pro staff and former AT contributor. So if they are touting speed (with numbers taken directly from the Oly. test event) then it must be important to them, right? 

Actually, I agree with you in that the arrow placement on the target is ultimately the most important thing. But let's face it - when you have a choice of slower limbs vs. faster limbs, which one will you choose? I also seem to recall you posting numbers early on in the Formula days. So is it important or not?


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

I think that it's important that if a manufacturer claims that their limbs are 4 fps faster, that they're about 4fps faster. I care that manufacturers are telling the truth. Ultimately, if I could put every arrow in the ten ring, I don't care what the arrows do, or how long they take to get there. At that point, nobody else would either.


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

well the Hoyt bashing goes on again I see.. well set my 6 provincial records with my Hoyt formula limbs.. shot smoother and faster than my win win .. just my observation and again guys compare apples to apples Hoyt makes many different limbs and qualities next you`ll say the 330 from Hoyt are slower well ya compared to a carbon foam limb with different characteristics .. be real here lets test same quality and construction and weight and length and poundage and arrow and dl as well and then we can say fast or slow .. Hoyt only stated I think 4 fps over what they manufactured right they did not make any comparisons between companies .. again just my opinion which we are all entitled too ...Hoyt makes excellent products try before you buy I guess then make your OWN educated guess stable limbs are great...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

whiz-Oz said:


> I think that it's important that if a manufacturer claims that their limbs are 4 fps faster, that they're about 4fps faster. I care that manufacturers are telling the truth. Ultimately, if I could put every arrow in the ten ring, I don't care what the arrows do, or how long they take to get there. At that point, nobody else would either.


Agreed. But few manufacturers, if any, are comparing their limbs to another brand. 4 fps. faster than their old stuff may just be telling us that their old stuff was slow! LOL! 

Classic, I don't see any bashing. If you have specific examples, please share. Otherwise, you're just Ford vs. Chevy...

If you have had better results with your Hoyt than your old W&W, I'm happy for you! Everyone should find the bow that they like best. 

I just got in from an extended practice session where the bow that was shooting 380 grain arrows 207 fps. outscored the bow that was shooting 360 grain arrows 213. Speed ain't everything. I'll be the first to admit that. But I think it's funny that one proponent of a certain bow will try to use speed as their measure, then the next will say that speed isn't that important. Which is it? I'm confused... 

If I can find a grip solution for the RX/F3 that I currently have at my house, I plan on letting it play too. No reason not to!

John


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

john I took the grip off my old excel and put it on my formula and it felt much better and still a reasonably high wrist c if you have one to try in the blk plastic.. found pressure with the wood rx grip on palm and thumb .... just a thought wider plastic seems to distribute pressure better and seems to shorten distance from palm to front of riser..


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

MaceHowling said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I want to get my first riser, but I don't know if I should consider getting a formula riser (ie. HPX, RX, Excel) or a ILF/HDS riser (GMX, Horizon, Excel). I know I am going to be in this sport for a long time, which leads me to think that I should get ILF/HDS riser so that I can easily use limbs from other companies, but that means I will not be able to use the formula limbs at all, since the connection points are longer. I have seen a few posts on adapters being made for Hoyt formula risers that allow for the use of ILF/HDS on them. This seems like a neat idea, since that would give me the most versatility as far as using different limbs, correct? Has anyone had any experience with these adapters and does anyone know where to buy them?
> 
> ...


If you don't already own limbs I think that an adapter is a terrible idea. The adapter plus a set of the cheapest limbs will be about the price of the Formula Excel limbs.

You could start with a Formula Excel riser with Formula Excel limbs. Then later upgrade either limbs or riser as you see fit. You'll have no problem selling the Formula Excel riser later on, because lots of people want these.

For me, ILF vs Formula was a coin toss. I'm upgrading from plain old Excel to Formula HPX with Border Limbs. (I might have to trade down to Formula RX if I decide that I don't like the resulting low brace height, but I figure that trading down is easier than trading up.)

If you don't have the cash to spare then go with ILF, as you'll be able to get a better bow on a medium budget. I see a huge variety of bows at our club -- my favorite risers, judging by looks alone, are the fancy carbon win and win, PSE X-appeal, and Hoyt Formula HPX. Best scores I've seen shot are with the PSE's, because that's what the best archers in our club happen to be using.

I'll buy the best bow I can -- I commute to work on a bicycle and a scooter to save the cost of a second car in the family and otherwise live well below my means but recreation and leisure are very important to me.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Classic, I have to borrow a plastic Excel grip from a student to try on the RX. It has a high wood grip on it now and I can barely shoot it. But my brother loves it and instructed me not to carve on it! ha, ha.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> But I think it's funny that one proponent of a certain bow will try to use speed as their measure, then the next will say that speed isn't that important. Which is it? I'm confused...


Well, as you're pointedly singling out me, you'll find that I never said anything other than 4 fps and I validated what Hoyt said. 

But what you might start to wonder is why I've decided that speed is a meaningless metric. 
But I'll give you a hint. 
I know that nobody on this forum can tell exactly what difference the speed makes other than a half assed assumption of sight marks. 
That's not related to accuracy. 

But I'm hoping that someone wants to speak out about what they "know for sure". There sure are a lot of unjustified opinions out there. 

Someone might think that I might be fishing for comments that might come back to haunt people.... 
and yes.
That's what I'm doing. 
You might wonder why.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Flehrad said:


> I don't think he was baiting you...


I was being facetious.

When Whiz-Oz makes a comment like that, someone is going to run with it. Its one of those unproovable debate starters that seems to provoke a responce of equal uselessness.

So, i thought id fill in with some just as pointless remarks, with regards to Paid poduim places are not representative of best bows. more a kin to best bows that come with dollars attached.

but still no real tangable data for customers to base thier opinions on purchases on, other than Look, Brady and Jake are on the payroll.
Which Gent won the olympics last time, and now whos shooting a different bow?
Why change a winning combo?


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Well, if you could spell prove, you might have more of a chance at it. 
But you can't actually prove how much more superior a faster bow is. 
So all you can do is say "faster is better". 
It is a few seconds work to run something through a chrono. But raw speed is only numbers without performance data resolvable to real hard data. 

And my pointless remarks can get you foaming at the mouth. 

We can discuss why archers prefer certain brands again if you'd like and shoot for contingency money. That's always an interesting discussion.


----------



## jhinaz (Mar 1, 2003)

If speed isn't an important factor when shooting 70M outdoors then why do most of the top male archers shoot bow weights in the 50+ pound range when 40 - 45 pound draw weight will easily reach 70M (as shown by the female archers)? Is it just a macho image thing.....or is there a real advantage to having a faster arrow (albeit a heavier arrow)? Inquisitive minds would like to know. - John


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

whiz-Oz said:


> Well, if you could spell prove, you might have more of a chance at it.
> But you can't actually prove how much more superior a faster bow is.
> So all you can do is say "faster is better".
> It is a few seconds work to run something through a chrono. But raw speed is only numbers without performance data resolvable to real hard data.
> ...


not fully sure foaming is the correct term.
To be foaming and still have a sence of humour about it. but then again, this is text with its limits.

The contingancy money certainly doesnt proove PMS is inferior to ILF.
40 reduction in limb bolt stress just to reduce the stress on a limb bolt that doesnt snap on other brands?


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

Some of us just use a combination that will raise hairs with both sides 









But, I own 7-8 pairs of limbs and 3 or so risers currently, still my primary bow is riser which was made ~1998 and limbs from ~1995. My "brand new" 2011 setup is backup at best.

I just can't get the same feel and shooting consistency from any modern combination I've tried. Maybe there is something about this "forgiveness" malarkey after all. I've been *****ing Sid previously to make those limbs again, as I feel that they have the perfect geometry, but perhaps the key is in old construction after all. Who knows.


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

Bringing the speed aspect back - in the compound world you have a spec that everyone "tries" to follow. 

Is there an accepted norm for testing speed of a recurve? I'm not aware of one, and attempting to do something similar (70# limbs @28" draw @5 grains per pound) just sounds painful.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Beastmaster said:


> Bringing the speed aspect back - in the compound world you have a spec that everyone "tries" to follow.
> 
> Is there an accepted norm for testing speed of a recurve? I'm not aware of one, and attempting to do something similar (70# limbs @28" draw @5 grains per pound) just sounds painful.


good question. 

I wouldnt expect too many bows would withstand this kind of abuse for two long.

We had a guy shoot a 62" bow 5.8gpp 95lbs at 28" drawn to 30". Bow lasted 18 months. We tried another 90lbs at 28" at 6gpp pulled to 30" 64" Lasted 20 months.

im not sure many compound guys shoot 5gpp all day every day either.

Zal, We still have the formers and Core dimensions and profiles for the XP10 limbs... Its possible!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

IIRC, it's 9 grains/lb. of draw weight at 28". Most "fast" traditional bows were in the 190 fps. range. Some have eclipsed the 200 fps. mark.

Here's a test by Norb Mullaney on O.L. Adcock's ACS longbow:

http://www.bowmaker.net/index2.htm

Click on "test data" to see Norb Mullaney's detailed results.

Or try Blacky Schwarz's site - www.bowreports.com for a little fun.

Quite a few traditional bows have been compared in this manner. But you'll never see the major manufacturers do this, because facts interfere with their marketing strategies far too often 

It's a whole lot safter to just say "we make the best" and "faster than anything we've ever made before," etc., etc.

John




Beastmaster said:


> Bringing the speed aspect back - in the compound world you have a spec that everyone "tries" to follow.
> 
> Is there an accepted norm for testing speed of a recurve? I'm not aware of one, and attempting to do something similar (70# limbs @28" draw @5 grains per pound) just sounds painful.


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

john pic of rx with excel grip on it


----------



## CLASSICHUNTER (May 20, 2005)

I have this riser for sale 25 inch in joad section .. or complete bow less case.. 40lb shorts f4`s


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Thanks. I like that grip for a stock grip. They did a good job on that one. They also do well to make sure their risers share grips across the line. Once an archer gets the grip they like, they shouldn't have to change it when they change risers. I can adapt to a new riser a lot faster than I can a new grip.

John.


----------



## Harperman (Sep 3, 2006)

Beastmaster said:


> Bringing the speed aspect back - in the compound world you have a spec that everyone "tries" to follow.
> 
> Is there an accepted norm for testing speed of a recurve? I'm not aware of one, and attempting to do something similar (70# limbs @28" draw @5 grains per pound) just sounds painful.


The Compound Manf. lie about draw length, arrow weight, and bow poundage, and in doing so the IBO, and ATA ratings are lies , or at least deceptions at best for most Makes/Models of compound bows...Now then, getting a "Standardized" testing of ILF/HDS design target Recurve bows would be great, but there are so many variables to consider, like how far the limbs are wound in or out, brace height settings, etc..etc...Maybe something like a standard of 45# @ 28", with the limbs wound in to max., Brace height at the mid range of the Manf. recommended height??....Arrow weight something around 8 g.p.p??.....But, tests like this will only be done by independent testers, because the Manf. likely wouldn't be too quick to offer up a new expensive bow for a fair and unbiased testing,, just in case the word might get out that the older bow that an archer owns now is plenty good enough....it seems that it takes a really outstanding Archer to actually reap the benefits of the newer, cutting edge equipment, while the rest of the average to slightly above average shooters can still shoot just as well with the older gear......Harperman


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> it seems that it takes a really outstanding Archer to actually reap the benefits of the newer, cutting edge equipment, while the rest of the average to slightly above average shooters can still shoot just as well with the older gear......Harperman


Maybe. But then again maybe not. Vic was still shooting his many years-old Mathews risers and SKY limbs at the trials, and again in Vegas. Butch has been known to go back to limbs that are several generations old. I've seen him shoot his old FX limbs and old wood core C+ limbs when much newer stuff was availalble to him. 

It really just depends on the archer, and what contracts they have to fulfill.

John


----------



## Harperman (Sep 3, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Maybe. But then again maybe not. Vic was still shooting his many years-old Mathews risers and SKY limbs at the trials, and again in Vegas. Butch has been known to go back to limbs that are several generations old. I've seen him shoot his old FX limbs and old wood core C+ limbs when much newer stuff was availalble to him.
> 
> It really just depends on the archer, and what contracts they have to fulfill.
> 
> John


John..........The last seven words of Your post seems to be the real deal...Nothing wrong with contracts, and promoting new gear, but it seems to me that recurve riser and limbs improve in such small increments that it's difficult for most folks to even see any real differences in scores or even arrow speed, from year to year...And hawking the new gear as faster, more accurate, better, when in fact it might not be is just Marketing, and that's where the wrong comes in, to me, personally....And riser or limb design changes that seem like quantum leaps are looked at with suspicion, or disbelief....The new gear sure is neat looking, though....Take care..........Harperman


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Harperman, we can also compare equipment all we want, and we're still only looking at 1/2 the equasion. The archer that's holding the gear is the other half. Brady and Jake have shot some amazing scores in the past few years. The question really is, had they stuck with the gear they were using before, what would those scores have been? If we say they wouldn't have achieved the scores they've shot with their current gear, then we're not giving them much credit for improving as archers, are we? 

It's a catch .22 when a well known, top archer promotes something. If they shoot statistically better scores immediately, then that's notable. Just winning events depends so much on who else shows up and how well they shoot that you can't narrow it down to just one piece of equipment making the difference. But immediately improved scores are notable. But if that archer shoots better over time, who's to say it isn't just the archer improving, regardless of what equipment they would be using?

Every time I see a top athlete promoting any product, I'm reminded of the scene in Forrest Gump, where he holds up the ping-pong paddle and says how great it is. 

John


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> Harperman, we can also compare equipment all we want, and we're still only looking at 1/2 the equasion. The archer that's holding the gear is the other half.


I would go so far as to say that the archer is a lot more than half. 
If you have equipment that in a shooting machine can constantly put arrows into the ten ring at 90 metres, the only variables left are atmospheric conditions and archer consistancy. 

Equipment with 10 ring consistency at 90 metres has been available for quite some time. Even medium level equipment is capable of excellent performance that far surpasses human ability.
The weakest part of archery performance is overwhelmingly already the human factor.
Bows are quite literally one of the simplest machines.
Arrow quality control and matching is already incredibly good across a number of brands. 

The most telling aspect of an archers success is how much effort they dedicate to improving. 
But most people want to think that performance can be bought or seize upon misguided ideas of natural talent or a mysterious ability to shoot accurately. 

If you're going to devote your life to archery, that doesn't leave much time or effort to devote to develop skills which will see you employed in anything else. So you shoot the gear which will pay the best contingency money. Common sense really.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I would go so far as to say that the archer is a lot more than half.
> If you have equipment that in a shooting machine can constantly put arrows into the ten ring at 90 metres, the only variables left are atmospheric conditions and archer consistancy.


I'll give you that. But if that's the case, then why on earth are some people willing to say that a particular bow is so much better than any of the rest? Really? Again, I say that comments like that just don't give the archer enough credit.



> If you're going to devote your life to archery, that doesn't leave much time or effort to devote to develop skills which will see you employed in anything else. So you shoot the gear which will pay the best contingency money. Common sense really.


Whiz, you and I both know that's really the bottom line. Top archers work their butts off to win, and put themselves in a position to sign the best contracts they can get, and earn the most contingency money they can earn, so they can continue to spend more time training than working (like the rest of us have to do  ). 

But I'd add that an archer talented enough to secure a spot as an RA should be smart enough to get an education while they are training. They have time to do that, and they will need it when they are no longer competitive or if they are injured. I don't know if the OTC offers any support for earning college degrees, but they should. I see no reason a young person training and living at a national training center cannot spend a few hours each day on studies. A full-time RA should be able to earn a bachelor's degree in-between Olympic games IMO.

Vic Wunderle was able too earn a college degree while he trained for the 2000 Oly. games and he did pretty well in Sydney, I'd say. So, there is time for both. Especially if you're earning enough contingency money to pay for tuition and your room and board is taken care of.

John


----------

