# Review of the Gillo GTL-88 Limbs



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

I don't shoot as much as I used to (1000+ arrows a week) due to some injuries including a really bad elbow tendon blow up 7 years ago but I still shoot a bit and I have shot most of the stuff on the USA Market. top of the line Hoyts, Samicks, Uukhas, WW, and the old school stuff such as the WINEX, WINACT, SKY JACK, Conquest etc. The top of the line Gillo limbs are among the best feeling limbs I have shot. I don't think one gains much, by spending another 100-150 to get the most expensive limbs. I do note that the SanLida limbs (Gold Galaxy) are very good limbs for their lower-mid level cost though. (then again so are the Gillo Q2).


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jim C said:


> I don't shoot as much as I used to (1000+ arrows a week) due to some injuries including a really bad elbow tendon blow up 7 years ago but I still shoot a bit and I have shot most of the stuff on the USA Market. top of the line Hoyts, Samicks, Uukhas, WW, and the old school stuff such as the WINEX, WINACT, SKY JACK, Conquest etc. The top of the line Gillo limbs are among the best feeling limbs I have shot. I don't think one gains much, by spending another 100-150 to get the most expensive limbs. I do note that the SanLida limbs (Gold Galaxy) are very good limbs for their lower-mid level cost though. (then again so are the Gillo Q2).


I would agree with that. 

I haven't shot a better pair of limbs for a barebow rig and as I get more used to them for my recurve, they are growing on me. That draw force curve does take some getting used to vs. a traditional limb like my Sky, Samick Masters or Masters Max. The limbs have very good dampening properties and are very quiet which makes them pleasant to shoot. 

I made the mistake of putting them on my ILF hunting riser (Gillo Ghost) the other day and I'll never be the same. LOL Absolutely smoked my hunting arrow on a rope to the target with virtually no vibration and they were the quietest limbs I've ever shot on that handle. If I ever do decide to play the 3D game, I have no doubt what combination I'll use.


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

I recently acquired a pair of 30# long GTL-88's. On a PSE XFactor, I'm getting right at 39# OTF with the bolts all the way in. I didn't do a side-by-side comparison, nor do I intend to, but I've shot Hoyt GM Carbon Plus, Hoyt Vectors, Sky Conquest, PSE XPression, and SF C+ limbs. Feel is subjective. The Gillo's "feel" very smooth at the clicker. Not a lot of vibration with 1/4" tiller and very quiet. Aligned them and set the nocking point & center shot and didn't tune after that. Shot a 1068 in gusty winds a week after that at the Ohio State Outdoor Championship. I ordered a different riser & limbs at the beginning of June. Wish I had given these limbs a closer look then.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

limbwalker said:


> I would agree with that.
> 
> I haven't shot a better pair of limbs for a barebow rig and as I get more used to them for my recurve, they are growing on me. That draw force curve does take some getting used to vs. a traditional limb like my Sky, Samick Masters or Masters Max. The limbs have very good dampening properties and are very quiet which makes them pleasant to shoot.
> 
> I made the mistake of putting them on my ILF hunting riser (Gillo Ghost) the other day and I'll never be the same. LOL Absolutely smoked my hunting arrow on a rope to the target with virtually no vibration and they were the quietest limbs I've ever shot on that handle. If I ever do decide to play the 3D game, I have no doubt what combination I'll use.


They are significantly quieter than the Gold Stars, I’ll give them that. But I wasn’t impressed like that. I expected to be. On the other hand, I have no complaints about them. They’re nice limbs.



InKYfromSD said:


> I recently acquired a pair of 30# long GTL-88's. On a PSE XFactor, I'm getting right at 39# OTF with the bolts all the way in. I didn't do a side-by-side comparison, nor do I intend to, but I've shot Hoyt GM Carbon Plus, Hoyt Vectors, Sky Conquest, PSE XPression, and SF C+ limbs. Feel is subjective. The Gillo's "feel" very smooth at the clicker. Not a lot of vibration with 1/4" tiller and very quiet. Aligned them and set the nocking point & center shot and didn't tune after that. Shot a 1068 in gusty winds a week after that at the Ohio State Outdoor Championship. I ordered a different riser & limbs at the beginning of June. Wish I had given these limbs a closer look then.


I guess I don’t understand why you wouldn’t do a side by side between what you’re shooting and what you’re thinking about buying if you have the opportunity.


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

FerrumVeritas said:


> They are significantly quieter than the Gold Stars, I’ll give them that. But I wasn’t impressed like that. I expected to be. On the other hand, I have no complaints about them. They’re nice limbs.
> 
> 
> 
> I guess I don’t understand why you wouldn’t do a side by side between what you’re shooting and what you’re thinking about buying if you have the opportunity.


If I could get my hands on a pair of 30# long Velos limbs, I'd do a comparison of them. But I can't. The GM C+ and one pair of XPressions are 40#. The Vectors (arguably the next smoothest) and the other pair of XPressions are 36#. Both pairs of Conquests are 38#. All of these are too heavy to shoot enough arrows to make a good comparison. The SF limbs are loud with high frequency vibration after the shot and slower or less effictient as my sight marks improved a LOT with the Gillos. They're also less than half the price of the Gillos. I think that anyone looking at spending Gillo dollars isn't going to be happy spending far less for SF. One could compare a '63 split window 'Vette with my first car, a '63 4-door Chevy Impala with a 230 cu in. inline 6 cyl but it wouldn't mean much to anyone interested in one car or the other. I don't have the energy or desire to tune and shoot all the different limb and arrow combinations neccessary to make a valid comparision.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I have a pair of 34# long GTL 88's, 34# long Samick Masters Max and 34# long original Samick Masters. On top of that I'm shooting as well right now as I have in 10 years. So I have a pretty good test setup at my disposal, I think. 

The other day, in practice, I shot a 350 at 60 meters with the Masters Max. I doubt I'll be able to duplicate that regardless of what limbs I use. I'm just now seeing 335-340's with the GTL 88's but as I said, the difference in DFC is significant and is taking some getting used to. The lack of a "wall" at the back (even though the Masters and Masters Max are pretty smooth conventional limbs) is noticeable and it's actually tricky to go back and forth between the two setups because I get a bit lost at the clicker. 

But I do enjoy shooting the GTL 88's and for that reason I'm getting better with them. I only shot 3 quick ends last night before sunset but half of those arrows were 10's. That's a good sign. 

Our state outdoor is this weekend and I'll probably let the GTL's play, since I shot the qualifier for the senior games with the Masters Max's. That will give me a good idea of how they compare in actual competition, which is all that really matters IMO.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

Let me know how the do in the heat. The person I borrowed them from said he felt they got significantly softer by the end of the day, which he wasn’t a fan of.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

FerrumVeritas said:


> Let me know how the do in the heat. The person I borrowed them from said he felt they got significantly softer by the end of the day, which he wasn’t a fan of.


I've shot them in 100+ degrees now and I didn't notice any change in the heat. I would have noticed and my sight mark would have changed. It did not.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Just came in from side-by-side testing GTL 88's vs my Samick Masters Max (which have served me very well over the years). The GTL's are more fun to shoot. Less vibration and quieter. BUT there is no doubt it's easier for me to get into line with the Masters. Maybe that's just because they are what my body is used to? But I can get into line and feel more relaxed and break the clicker easier (because I know where I am in the cycle) with the Masters. That said, the GTL's seem to forgive a bad release a little better. I'm getting 9's out of shots that would be 8's with the Masters. If I'm on, I can shoot lights out with the Masters, but if I'm not on, I score a little better with the GTL's even though I struggle to get in line and break the clicker a hair more with them.

The plan at this point is to start with the GTL's at state outdoor and have the Masters Max ready as a backup if I start to struggle too much. Both bows are identical (27" G1's) with identical setups all around. Only difference is the limbs. Both are drawing within 2 oz. of each other on my scale.

More to come...


----------



## tassie_devil (Aug 15, 2018)

limbwalker said:


> struggle to get in line and break the clicker a


Presumably this comes from the GTL being ‘smoother’ at the back end. The energy has to be put into the limbs at some point in the process, so it might be a little harder earlier when you are moving into line.

Out of curiosity, are the sight marks/arrow setup about the same with each?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

tassie_devil said:


> Presumably this comes from the GTL being ‘smoother’ at the back end. The energy has to be put into the limbs at some point in the process, so it might be a little harder earlier when you are moving into line.
> 
> Out of curiosity, are the sight marks/arrow setup about the same with each?


The pre-load of the GTL's throws me off a bit at setup. Then the lack of a wall throws me off a bit when I start to aim and expand. With the "wall" on the Masters, I can get to that point and then kinda settle into my anchor and then just break the clicker by expanding against that wall. With the GTL's I don't feel settled at the clicker. But this is something I could get used to I think. Lots of years with a different DFC created some habits. 

The sight marks are indeed the same and I have a chrono - oddly they are both within 1 fps. of each other. I would have thought with the preload the GTL's would have been a bit faster, but not according to the chrono.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

limbwalker said:


> The pre-load of the GTL's throws me off a bit at setup. Then the lack of a wall throws me off a bit when I start to aim and expand. With the "wall" on the Masters, I can get to that point and then kinda settle into my anchor and then just break the clicker by expanding against that wall. With the GTL's I don't feel settled at the clicker. But this is something I could get used to I think. Lots of years with a different DFC created some habits.
> 
> The sight marks are indeed the same and I have a chrono - oddly they are both within 1 fps. of each other. I would have thought with the preload the GTL's would have been a bit faster, but not according to the chrono.


I couldn't chrono, but it did seem like the GTL-88's recurve had the DFC change (heavy preload, steady gain on the back end) but not the speed benefits. I wonder if the choice to make the GTL-88 a bit heavier was because it gave them lower frequency vibrations than a lighter limb would have?


----------



## tassie_devil (Aug 15, 2018)

FerrumVeritas said:


> DFC change (heavy preload, steady gain on the back end) but not the speed benefits


Adding preload, or changing the DFC* will not give any inherent speed benefits. It changes where your perceived 'effort' goes. Energy into the arrow = energy into the bow x efficiency of the bow.

The only way to get more speed is to put more energy in or have a more efficient bow setup. The DFC is not part of this equation - it relates to feel.

* we assume here a fixed energy input (ie. same area under the curve). Preload is stored energy, but it is not released into the arrow. It just means for each increment of draw you have to put in more energy early, hence the smoother feeling through the clicker.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

tassie_devil said:


> Adding preload, or changing the DFC* will not give any inherent speed benefits. It changes where your perceived 'effort' goes. Energy into the arrow = energy into the bow x efficiency of the bow.
> 
> The only way to get more speed is to put more energy in or have a more efficient bow setup. The DFC is not part of this equation - it relates to feel.
> 
> * we assume here a fixed energy input (ie. same area under the curve). Preload is stored energy, but it is not released into the arrow. It just means for each increment of draw you have to put in more energy early, hence the smoother feeling through the clicker.


Sorry, I missed a clause when I wrote that. It should say something like "the GTL-88 have the DFC change but not the speed benefits I expected from their more recurved profile compared to conventional limbs." Because additional recurve is typically associated with faster limbs (Border, Uukha), although W&W generally uses it for a smoother draw (MXT vs NS) gaining their speed from material construction (MXT-GF vs MXT-10). At least that's my understanding.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

tassie_devil said:


> Adding preload, or changing the DFC* will not give any inherent speed benefits. It changes where your perceived 'effort' goes. Energy into the arrow = energy into the bow x efficiency of the bow.
> 
> The only way to get more speed is to put more energy in or have a more efficient bow setup. The DFC is not part of this equation - it relates to feel.
> 
> * we assume here a fixed energy input (ie. same area under the curve). Preload is stored energy, but it is not released into the arrow. It just means for each increment of draw you have to put in more energy early, hence the smoother feeling through the clicker.












Orange line is the draw force curve for Uukha SX+ limbs. MORE area under the curve, means more stored energy.
The Uukha SX+ limbs had the fastest chrono reading at 208.20 fps. fr a 365 grain arrow.

The two other limbs were Hoyt Velos and W&W MXT-10 limbs.

W&W MXT-10 was 204.40 fps.
Hoyt Velos was 203.80 fps.
"pre-load is stored energy, but it is NOT released into the arrow."

Really?
If the brace height is tuned properly, then, the PRE-LOAD stored energy is ABSOLUTELY released into the arrow.
This is the purpose for brace height tuning.

When the brace height is NOT tuned, then the energy transfer from bow limbs to the arrow is in-efficient
and excess energy is wasted by vibrating the riser and the limbs (limbs will oscillate and hum), and the riser will buzz the bow hand.

So, assumed a TUNED bow, if you have MORE area under the DFC, you will also see MORE arrow speed.






Now, if you design a limb with a GREAT draw force curve...meaning LOTS of area under the curve,
for LOTS and LOTS of potential energy...

but your limbs are REALLY MASSIVE (unsprung weight)...meaning HEAVY limbs for the limbs with the great DFC
and you are comparing to say Uukhas, which are very LIGHT weight limbs, limbs with a slightly LESSER stored energy for the DFC, COULD generate more arrow speed, due to less unsprung weight.

IF the three sets of limbs are roughly equal mass, and ONE set of limbs has the larger area under the DFC,
then, this set of limbs will have the HIGHEST arrow speed...assuming you tune the brace height for quietest shot
for each of the three limbs (most efficient energy transfer).


----------



## tassie_devil (Aug 15, 2018)

Hi N&B,

Sorry, I was unclear. I agree completely that if we increase the area under the DFC then we should see an increase in arrow speed. I had interpreted the previous post as suggesting that making it steeper in the front and softer in the back should result in a speed increase, which it should not (unless, as I said, the area increases).

I was only trying to make the point we should not expect a free lunch (e.g. two sets of 40lb OTF limbs are not equal in terms of shooting effot). We need to put the energy into the bow somewhere. If you increase the area under the DFC you need to put more energy in. Different limb profiles will appeal to different people here. You don't need to design a 'great limb' to increase this area. Just shoot a few more pounds. But we tend to have a preference for where in the shot cycle the 'effort' goes.

I only disagree on pre-load. When you go to shoot your next arrow, the pre-load energy is still there. It hasn't disappeared with the previous arrow.

Changing brace-height changes preload, but the new preload also stays in the bow. Changing braceheight does two things (which you already explained above):

Changes the actual length you draw the string => area under the DFC
Changes the efficiency of the bow. Which, as you already explained above, results in more of the energy stored in the bow being transferred into the arrow towards the target.
To be honest, I think we understand it the same, we have just put it differently. Tuning and limb mass, are of course important, because as you already said, they affect the efficiency of the bow.

Regards,

James


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

As a general comment, BH tuning is the most important factor in tuning very curved limbs. For instance,C88 limbs need 1/8" to 1/4" LESS in BH from a standard curved limb to work at their best.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

Vittorio said:


> As a general comment, BH tuning is the most important factor in tuning very curved limbs. For insatnce,C88 limbs need 1/8" to 1/4" LESS in BH from a standard curved limb to work at their best.


I realized that the next morning listening to a podcast that interviewed Sid Ball. I have to assume that’s why I got a weird, constant, low frequency vibration. It obviously wouldn’t affect the smoothness, but I can definitely see it as a reason the limbs seemed slower.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

GTL 88's did very well in competition this weekend. 

I started the event with my gray 27" G1 and Masters Max limbs, as that is the bow I was most comfortable with. However, after a few ends I started to notice an audible "click" noise on each shot. I've heard that before with that gray riser but have never been able to fully diagnose it's source. I continued to use that bow through the first 36 arrows, then after two ends of the second pass I had lost confidence in that setup. I wasn't getting the groups I expected and became concerned that "click" noise on the shot meant I was having clearance issues. My goal of breaking the US 72-arrow record was not achievable at that point (on Saturday) so I set up my black 27" G1 with the Gillo GTL 88 limbs and started "practicing" for Sunday. I shot the final 4 ends on Saturday with that bow, then arrived early enoug on Sunday to shoot a bit on the practice field before official practice began. 

My first 36-arrow pass with the GTL-88's was a 336 (60 meters masters distance), so I knew I had made the right decision. The GTL-88's are just so much quieter and dampen so quickly they are a pleasure to shoot. The archers on either side of me commented on how much quieter that bow was than the other riser with the Masters Max limbs. 

I started "leaking oil" toward the end of the day simply from fatigue. I'm not used to shooting 100 arrows/day anymore. I've been battling a finger issue on my string hand and have had to limit the amount of practice to protect it. But I finished yesterday with a 659 total, good enough for a new US record and enough that combined with my day 1 score, is a new masters recurve world record (1306). I wonder what it might have been had I just started with the GTL-88's from the first scored arrow.  

Conditions were near-perfect with only a few ends of swirling gusts midway through day 1. The conditions we had yesterday have really never been seen before here in Texas for an outdoor event. Practically perfect archery weather, which is very rare for us indeed. 

I want to thank Vittorio for sending me those limbs, and for his support over all the years I've been shooting. The GTL-88's are legitimate world-class limbs. I will be looking for a 2nd pair now, and probably will retire my two pairs of Masters limbs soon.

I also want to thank Paul Jager for working with me for so long now to provide grips for my risers that are made to my exact specifications. It's nice to be able to pick up whichever bow I want and never notice a difference in the grip!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I should add that I caught a lot of lines and shot a lot of 9's that probably would have been 8's with my other limbs. These GTL limbs seem to be a bit more forgiving than what I'm used to. Maybe it's in my head, but that's half the battle right ?!?

I think once I really get used to the draw force curve on these limbs, I'll be able to push those scores up a fair bit. Only that one pass reflected what I feel I'm capable of.


----------



## TR1960 (Jan 3, 2016)

Mucho congrats on the World Record, set by a class Archer!


----------



## kosol_sol (Dec 30, 2016)

Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

TR1960 said:


> Mucho congrats on the World Record, set by a class Archer!


Thank you.


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.


For the cell phone crowd.


*Gillo GTL-88 limbs*Borrowed from club member*Currently shooting Galaxy Gold Star 34# limbs*Drawing 38# OTF*AMO DL 29"


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.



*70" bow*Tested 38# Gillo GTL-88 limbs*Kept Brace same at 22.5 cm*Kept Plunger tension same*Kept Centershot same


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.



*Same arrows*Same nocking point*Same rest position*Only adjustments were to limb pockets for pounds OTF*Measurements were for arrow drawn to 27" to plunger (AMO 28-3/4")


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.



*GTL limbs more recurved profile*GTL limbs appear similar to W&W MXT-G limbs for amount of "super recurve"*GTL limbs are multi layer foam and carbon construction*GTL limbs are 5 gm heavier than Gold Star limbs, with limb savers installed on Gold Star*GTL limbs are wider than Gold Star limbs


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.



*GTL limbs set at 37.5# @27" DLPP (27" to pivot point) using a scale*GTL limbs have no natural tiller, meaning can flip limbs upside down in limb pockets and same tiller*GTL limbs have slower arrow speed, arrows hitting 4" low compared to Gold Star limbs*Using Gillo GT riser, and limb pockets turned out, to get same pounds OTF*String walker, so tried new test


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.



*Adjusted Gillo GT limb pockets so same string walking crawl for both limbs*Fired a 30 arrow round*Gillo GTL limbs resulted in new personal best score, 2 points higher*Gillo GTL limbs are smooth, but not soft*Gillo GTL limbs have weird low frequency vibration, long duration even after the shot


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.



*To get to same stringwalking crawl, GTL-88s measured 39.2# @ 27" DLPP, 1.2# heavier than Gold Star Limbs*Gold Star limbs feel softer*Gold Star limbs feel harsher*Gold Star limbs have high frequency vibration (although minor), even with limb savers installed*Gillo GTL are nice limbs


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.



*Galaxy Gold Star limbs are outstanding value, 95% as good at GTL limbs, for half the price


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points? This whole thing is way too long.


You post so weird.

The review is not long at all.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

kosol_sol said:


> Can you summarize the review to bullet points?


No.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Again, I have to point out that keeping same BH for GTL -C88 as for standard limbs is simply limiting their performance. More curved limbs in general (not C88 only) need lower BH to perform at best.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

Vittorio said:


> Again, I have to point out that keeping same BH for GTL -C88 as for standard limbs is simply limiting their performance. More curved limbs in general (not C88 only) need lower BH to perform at best.


Is a 225 millimeter brace height a normal brace height for more curved limbs? A good height to start tuning at? Or a little high?


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

TER said:


> Is a 225 millimeter brace height a normal brace height for more curved limbs? A good height to start tuning at? Or a little high?


Uukha recommendations for Brace.



https://www.uukha.com/archive/archive/img/Notice-branches-2018-EN.pdf



72" recurve bow. Brace at 232mm, +/- 10mm.

70" recurve bow. Brace at 225mm, +/- 10mm, so 9.13 inches recommended, and as low as 8.74-inches and as much as 9.53 inches.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

TER said:


> Is a 225 millimeter brace height a normal brace height for more curved limbs? A good height to start tuning at? Or a little high?


70" bow with GTL-C88 limbs, 9" as a start on G1 and GQ 25, a bit less on GT and GX
As a general procedure for all bow lengths and any kind of limb, set tiller, then hold the riser firmly, and try to move up and down the nocking point, changing BH until you find the spot of the most stable vertical stability. That should be the starting point to fine-tune the bow.
Pls note that BH for GILLO 23/25/27/29 GT riser should be the same using the same pair of limbs.,


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

Vittorio said:


> 70" bow with GTL-C88 limbs, 9" as a start on G1 and GQ 25, a bit less on GT and GX
> As a general procedure for all bow lengths and any kind of limb, set tiller, then hold the riser firmly, and try to move up and down the nocking point, changing BH until you find the spot of the most stable vertical stability. That should be the starting point to fine-tune the bow.
> Pls note that BH for GILLO 23/25/27/29 GT riser should be the same using the same pair of limbs.,


It’s worth noting that I was well within that range when I tried the limbs out. I could definitely have fine tuned it more if I had had more time, which probably would have made up for a bit of the speed/weight discrepancy. But the fact that the limbs are heavier must also make a difference.

And it was stable enough for me to shoot a respectable 266/300 on a very roughly tuned bow.

What really surprised me was that they draw was not noticeably smoother. Now, I’ve only got a 29” draw length, but with a pretty deep crawl on a 70” bow I’m probably a very average barebow shooter in that regard. And adjusting brace height would not change the poundage change per inch when at full draw.


----------



## h00fhearted (Dec 29, 2018)

I have a Gillo 27" GT with the Long 34lb GTL-C88 limbs making it 72" 37lbs at my draw length for Barebow. Use BCY 8125 18 thread ACE 670 and Victory VAP 700 100 grain large G nocks. With all that, the brace height 8 3/4 to just under 9 (8 7/8). The string grove is not visible. I too am impressed with this combo. I did have to remove the plastic nylon washer from the GT riser elastomer. The nylon washers were deforming the elastomer as they butted against the riser so I removed them. I don't know if this would alter the brace height.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

h00fhearted said:


> I have a Gillo 27" GT with the Long 34lb GTL-C88 limbs making it 72" 37lbs at my draw length for Barebow. Use BCY 8125 18 thread ACE 670 and Victory VAP 700 100 grain large G nocks. With all that, the brace height 8 3/4 to just under 9 (8 7/8). The string grove is not visible. I too am impressed with this combo. I did have to remove the plastic nylon washer from the GT riser elastomer. The nylon washers were deforming the elastomer as they butted against the riser so I removed them. I don't know if this would alter the brace height.


The M10 nylon washer on top of the neoprene spring is there for a reason. Avoids the rubber entering deep inside the bottom slot of the pocket and getting damaged when you adjust the poundage.


----------



## h00fhearted (Dec 29, 2018)

Thank you Vittorio for getting back. I don't want to highjack the discussion. I have photos for you to look over. Maybe something I did wrong in adjustment. I understand why you use them, when you crank down on the adjustment bolt it puts a real strain on both the nylon washer and the elastomer/neoprene


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

As said, they are there for a reason...


----------

