# 279 fps.........Whoa......and it's a longbow



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

I just got an email from Alaskan Bowhunting Supply, and they are advertising the Qarbon Nano longbow with an IBO speed of 279 fps, shesh who needs a compound. Imagine what they might get with recurve limbs. 

http://www.alaskabowhunting.com/Webpage.aspx?WebpageId=56

Wouldn't mind using this bow with Rage broadheads, wink wink.

Seriously though makes you think how far traditional equipment has come from the simple stick.

So let's keep it fun here, love to know what you think but I'm in no mood to hear you preach. After all this is supposed to be a hobby, I can still get my meat from the butcher.

Here is how they tested for IBO just in case you were wondering

Speed Testing the GrizzlyStik Qarbon Nano all Carbon Longbow

IBO bow speeds are what everyone seems to compare these days. To calculate a bow's IBO speed you shoot a 350 grain arrow, from a 70# bow drawn 30”. This system is really set up for compounds and many recurve and longbows have historically been 70# bows @ 28" but drawn to 30". They just don't tell you that they're doing that. They're actually shooting a bow that's up to 8# heavier.

Our Qarbon Nano was clocked at an IBO speed of 279 feet per second.



For AMO speeds you shoot a 540 grain arrow from a bow that pulls 60# @ 30". Ours weighed 54# @ 28" and 59# @ 30".

The GrizzlyStik Qarbon Nano has an AMO speed right at 200 fps.

For this testing we used a Hooter Shooter set up with a mechanical release. The reason you see a varied number of shots taken is because once I got four in a row of the exact same speeds from the first arrow, we wanted four in a row of exactly the same result s for the others as well.

To us this proves that not only is the bow blazing fast, but it’s phenomenally consistent. (Even the variance was only one fps.)

Also very important to us is that since we didn’t doctor any of this, our customers should be able to get very similar speeds from the bows they buy from us. If they have a hooter shooter they should be able to match our speeds. Try that with most compounds on the market...

We know that speed is a yardstick that people use to compare bows, and that's OK. We designed a bow that casts heavy arrows hard, but we wanted more than that from this bow. The Qarbon Nano does it all amazingly well. It's light in the hand (around 2#) but the shock absorbs ion qualities of the carbon riser combined with the unique limb design virtually eliminates hand shock.

Win & Win makes their own foam for the limb cores, they make their own carbon too. That gives the Qarbon Nano a limb composition that no other longbow in the world has. The limbs are not only fast, they're consistent. They shoot the same shot after shot no matter where you are in the world. That's important to bowhunters who take their hunting seriously.

Tip to tip, this bow has been engineered for perfection. Experience longbow perfection today, stop in to your local archery shop and ask to test drive a GrizzlyStik Qarbon Nano.
Check out our GrizzlyStik Qarbon Nano speed testing data below:



Bow Weight

Arrow Weight

Speed
54# @28"

352 grains

217 fps
54# @28"

352 grains

217 fps
54# @28"

352 grains

217 fps
54# @28"

352 grains

217 fps





59# @ 30"

352 grains

237 fps
59# @ 30"

352 grains

236 fps
59# @ 30"

352 grains

237 fps
59# @ 30"

352 grains

237 fps
59# @ 30"

352 grains

237 fps
59# @ 30"

352 grains

237 fps





54# @28"

539 grains

183 fps
54# @28"

539 grains

184 fps
54# @28"

539 grains

184 fps
54# @28"

539 grains

184 fps
54# @28"

539 grains

184 fps





59# @ 30"

539 grains

199 fps
59# @ 30"

539 grains

200 fps
59# @ 30"

539 grains

200 fps
59# @ 30"

539 grains

199 fps
59# @ 30"

539 grains

200 fps
59# @ 30"

539 grains

200 fps
59# @ 30"

539 grains

200 fps
59# @ 30"

539 grains

200 fps


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I have talked about this in other threads - I personally find this the most hypocritical nonsense I have ever seen. 

Alaskan Bowhunting Supply is the biggest promoter of Ashby and his research and ideas about super heavy arrows with EFOC - yet they advertise a bow that they offer based on IBO speed ratings - of 5 grains per pound of draw? I have the Ashby chronies in breakin' my balls for using 7.4 grains per pound - even though I demonstrated in video taped tests that these arrows actually penetrated slightly better than heavier slower arrows.

TBM just ran a review of this bow from Blacky - and guess what - this bow is no faster than any well made recurve or longbow when using a heavier arrow.

It is really deceptive advertising - nobody in the Trad bowhunting world is out there hunting with arrows that are 5 grains per pound of draw - in fact with a hunting weight bow you could not even find an arrow of the proper spine that would be only 5 grains per pound of draw - it would be impossible - unless you were to shoot an arrow that was dramatically under spined.


----------



## GEREP (May 6, 2003)

*


LongStick64 said:



Seriously though makes you think how far traditional equipment has come from the simple stick.

So let's keep it fun here, love to know what you think ...

Click to expand...

*
Blacky shows it at about 190fps/9gpp @ 28"

Nice, but not 1400.00 nice. 

You can get performance just as good for half the price.

KPC


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

Keep in mind to get the 237 they used a 352 grain arrow drawn to 30" Blacky used a 426 grain arrow drawn to 28 inches. 

What I am most curious about this bow is how will it stand up to consistent shooting especially using light arrows.

Sharp I agree it's all advertising but as you pointed out in your Rage thread, advertising and honesty in archery equipment is laughable.


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

If anything the performance with Blacky's report at the very least puts it in the recurve class, so does that end the argument that recurves are faster ???


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Not all advertising in archery is laughable - the Rage did exactly what it said it would do for me. My Tradtech is exactly was advertised, my carbon tech cheetahs are as advertised - in fact - better - but when a business that promotes heavy arrows to the point of absurdity then offers a bow and advertises it's performance based on an arrow so light that you could not even obtain one of the proper spine to shoot out of a hunting weight bow - that is really getting out of line.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

sharpbroadhead said:


> ...in fact with a hunting weight bow you could not even find an arrow of the proper spine that would be only 5 grains per pound of draw - it would be impossible - unless you were to shoot an arrow that was dramatically under spined.


Really? Impossible? I've personally hunted and shot with a guy who shoots 3Ds with a hunting weight bow and arrows slightly less than 5 grains per pound.


----------



## vabowdog (Dec 13, 2007)

Ken, would have to agree 110%,Alaska bowhunting supply talks about shooting 5gpp at 250???? Jim belcher had a wooden riser recurve 2 years ago that could do the exact same speed for half the cost. I get sick of all the speed hype with trad archery I thought that's why we left the wheely world?? My hunting setup is 11 gpp getting an amazingly quiet 177 fps and I killed 5 deer last year with it from directly under my stand all the way out to 30 yards with none jumping the string.


Dewayne


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

J. Westbrock - if he is shooting a bow that is over 40lbs draw there is no way that he can get an arrow to weigh less than 5 grains per pound of draw unless he is shooting an arrow that is dramatically under spined.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

sharpbroadhead said:


> J. Westbrock - if he is shooting a bow that is over 40lbs draw there is no way that he can get an arrow to weigh less than 5 grains per pound of draw unless he is shooting an arrow that is dramatically under spined.


He shoots low 40s, and since he's won five IBO world championships, I'm guessing he knows what he's doing. Thanks for your input though. :wink:


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I don't care how many world championships he has won - there is no way to get an arrow that is spined for that bow to shoot out of a 40lb bow unless - perhaps he is using a rest and plunger and pushing it out past center in the other direction forcing the arrow to wrap around the bow. A proper spine arrow for a bow in the 40lb range would be a .500 spine - you find me a .500 spine arrow with a broadhead, insert, feltching, and nock that weighs less than 200 grains (40lb bow) - for crying out loud the broadhead and insert alone is going to be at least 100 grains!

hmm - lets consider this - if you are using a 75 grain broadhead and insert that is anywhere from 12 to 25 grains - lets go in the middle and say 15 grains - so the broadhead and insert are 90 grains. The nock is going to be about 12 grains and the fletching will be roughly another 15 grains so we are now at a total of 117 grains

You said he is shooting in the low 40lb range - lets say that it is 43lbs - to be less than 5 grains per pound of draw the arrow would have to weigh less than 215 grains

sooo

215 grains - the 117 grains for the broadhead, insert, nock and fletching - gives us 98 grains for the shaft. Lets assume he has the standard 28" draw and uses a 29" arrow - that means that the arrow shaft would have to weigh less than 3.38 grains per inch.

Please tell me the name of such an arrow shaft and where it is purchased.

If you need to borrow a shovel - it can be arranged.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

I feel it's just some fancy advertising scheme to entice someone wanting to shoot traditional equipment coming from a world (compounds) where speed is/all it has been about for the last few years...The see fast...so they look there first..You got all of these well known names promoting it..so..the hook is set..

To my way of thinking...getting the last fps out of a hunting arrow isn't as important as shrinking the group size down to the smallest attainable inch..and just because they can achieve repeatability off a hooter shooter...doesn't mean it will feel good in the hand or when drawn..The bow has to feel good to most people..otherwise they won't be as accurate..

In the trad world...quite fast and accurate are the milestones to shoot for..along with good looks (subjective of-course)..this bow IMHO doesn't come close on the last..and no mention on the first...but..we all know what it will take to quite a 5 gpi arrow...Maybe they should be targeting the tournament crowd where it doesn't matter if it's a loud bow..?

One last thing...when these speeds are attained off a hooter shooter...they are using a mechanical release..not their fingers if I am not mistaken correct ?

Mac


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I don't care how many world championships he has won - there is no way to get an arrow that is spined for that bow to shoot out of a 40lb bow unless - perhaps he is using a rest and plunger and pushing it out past center in the other direction forcing the arrow to wrap around the bow.


Rest, yes. Plunger, yes. Centershot is not past center. Dang near dead down the center actually. And for the record, those five IBO titles were in the last two years.

Next...



sharpbroadhead said:


> A proper spine arrow for a bow in the 40lb range would be a .500 spine - you find me a .500 spine arrow with a broadhead, insert, feltching, and nock that weighs less than 200 grains (40lb bow) - for crying out loud the broadhead and insert alone is going to be at least 100 grains!


You do know that people don't generally shoot 3Ds with broadheads right?

Next...



sharpbroadhead said:


> hmm - lets consider this - if you are using a 75 grain broadhead and insert that is anywhere from 12 to 25 grains - lets go in the middle and say 15 grains - so the broadhead and insert are 90 grains. The nock is going to be about 12 grains and the fletching will be roughly another 15 grains so we are now at a total of 117 grains


You've apparently never heard of nibb points. 

Next...



sharpbroadhead said:


> If you need to borrow a shovel - it can be arranged.


I appreciate the offer, but you're not done using it yet. Clearly you don't know as much as you think you do. :wink:


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> I don't care how many world championships he has won - there is no way to get an arrow that is spined for that bow to shoot out of a 40lb bow unless - perhaps he is using a rest and plunger and pushing it out past center in the other direction forcing the arrow to wrap around the bow. A proper spine arrow for a bow in the 40lb range would be a .500 spine - you find me a .500 spine arrow with a broadhead, insert, feltching, and nock that weighs less than 200 grains (40lb bow) - for crying out loud the broadhead and insert alone is going to be at least 100 grains!
> 
> hmm - lets consider this - if you are using a 75 grain broadhead and insert that is anywhere from 12 to 25 grains - lets go in the middle and say 15 grains - so the broadhead and insert are 90 grains. The nock is going to be about 12 grains and the fletching will be roughly another 15 grains so we are now at a total of 117 grains
> 
> ...


Your numbers are off. You can (and I do) build a 230-240 grain arrow for 3D quite easily, and it will handle 45# at a 28" draw nicely. That is using screw-in points, glue-ins could get you down around 220grains and still retain around 10% FOC.
I'm not saying that it would be easy to tune or terribly accurate, but it is definitely possible.
GT Ultralight 600 at 28" BOP, 5.7GPI=160gr
3x1.5" feathers=4gr
QAD nock=5gr
50gr glue in.

220grains total. The arrow could be shot as short as 27" if it wasn't stiff enough (which I highly doubt). An even lighter arrow could be built with something like a McKinney II or Victory VAP but they are awefully skinny for 3D use.

You might need the shovel.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

We were talking about HUNTING bows - he said he hunted and shot 3d with a guy who hunts with arrows that are less than 5 grains per pound of draw - the whole point of the deceptive ad is that Alaskan BOWHUNTING SUPPLY is about HUNTING BOWS AND ARROWS - they advertise constantly how you need super heavy arrows - and then they run an ad promoting a bow that is shooting arrows that are 5 grains per pound of draw - come on.

Show me what 3d only stuff Alskan Bowhunting Supply sells or promotes - we are - or at least SHOULD be talking about hunting equipment - if I missunderstood and the thread was changed to target and 3d archery only - that really has no part whatsoever in this discussion - since Alskan BOWHUNTING Supply is not about 3D or target archery at all - they are soley a bowhunting supply store.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> We were talking about HUNTING bows - he said he hunted and shot 3d with a guy who hunts with arrows that are less than 5 grains per pound of draw - the whole point of the deceptive ad is that Alaskan BOWHUNTING SUPPLY is about HUNTING BOWS AND ARROWS - they advertise constantly how you need super heavy arrows - and then they run an ad promoting a bow that is shooting arrows that are 5 grains per pound of draw - come on.
> 
> Show me what 3d only stuff Alskan Bowhunting Supply sells or promotes - we are - or at least SHOULD be talking about hunting equipment - if I missunderstood and the thread was changed to target and 3d archery only - that really has no part whatsoever in this discussion - since Alskan BOWHUNTING Supply is not about 3D or target archery at all - they are soley a bowhunting supply store.


You stated that there was no way a 5GPP arrow could be made which was spined correctly to be shot with a 45# bow. Then we proved you wrong.
55grain broadheads are available and could be used to make an arrow <230grains for hunting use. Which according to your theories on arrow weight and penetration would be the best arrow for thin-skinned game possible.

Best get that shovel.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

sharpbroadhead said:


> …he said he hunted and shot 3d with a guy who hunts with arrows that are less than 5 grains per pound of draw -


 (underline mine)

Are you _sure_ about that? Better read it again. 




grantmac said:


> Best get that shovel.


And a pair of work gloves. Blisters...ouch. :wink:


----------



## rsarns (Sep 23, 2008)

Grant... you are killing me.... LOL.. now don't be confusing people with facts! Let me go on record, I have shot 500 spine Victory Vaps at 245 gr's out of my bernardini riser with 42# limbs, and I have a 30" DL, so 48#'s at the fingers, spined right and accurate with good arrow flight... enough to win a lot of State Championships and a couple of 2nds in the Nationals this year. I hate shovels....


----------



## WindWalker (Jan 23, 2005)

Damn, sharp, you need to hang out with live people more often. 

You are one know-it-all and quick to contradict, sea lawyer. Do you always need to be so visceral and mean-mouth about everything and to everyone you do not agree with? You have experienced people who possess directly-observed facts and/or hands-on knowledge telling you what is, and you are telling them, in a manner, they are talking out their butt. Also, you are so quickly bent on proving your are right and others are wrong, you commonly fail to completely read and thoroughly understand what was actually said (posted). Jeez!


*BTW:* As for your arrow weight vs. penetration testing; I doubt a stadium full of experienced shooters will ever be able to (finally) convince you that the testing was "shade tree" at best and *proves nothing*. You are trying to get experienced archers to accept that the results of a few fieldpoint-mounted arrows shot into a phone book balanced on a crate are scientifically conclusive and universally applicable. Don't mean to hurt your feelings nor make you feel embarrassed, but it's quite laughable.

As for your killing one deer with the Rage; one deer kill does not by itself confirm that what is advertised is factual and 100% accurate. There are many other former Rage users that will disagree. 

Take a tranquilizer!


----------



## Forrest Halley (Jul 24, 2011)

Pardon me for falling asleep in class here gents...I was looking for the amazing bloodtrail. 237 is not anywhere close to 279. Where is the 279 coming from? I can't understand why it'd be billed like that unless it could do it. It's just too easy to prove or disprove. I'm guessing that since it said the bow was dryfired round the clock for seven days...we don't need to worry about 5 GPP or 8 GPP. I saw custom orders accepted also so I am guessing that one is not limited to 70# either. If the bow really is as mean as they say it is...somebody please come forward and show it doing what it's talking about. I'm interested, but only if it will run as billed. My guess is that it's one loud bow at the light GPP. Who is making a 55 gr broadhead?


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

nice switch from a discussion about hunting to 3d - get real - this is just stupid - as I said - what does Alaskan BOWHUNTING SUPPLY have to do with 3D? I was talking about a HUNTING set up -not 3D - I missed that he switched the entire topic of discussion from HUNTING to 3D


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Forest the bottom line is that it was totally deceptive advertising - you and I can see that - but a few guys want to change the entire subject.


----------



## Forrest Halley (Jul 24, 2011)

Yes it's deceptive. I 'd still like to see the concept come to fruition. It's a nice idea to get compound speeds out of a recurve. Are they getting higher speeds out of a different length limb than the results are using? For the money I hope this bow is flawless and smooth as a baby's bottom...I'd like to see a come to Jesus about the 279. 

In other news I shot the new PSE Omen twice today. Goodness! That is one aggressive set of cams and it felt like moving a mountain trying to get to full draw at 65#. The first shot I shanked 3 inches left at 20 yds. The second shot was centered in the X. It was kinda like an AR-15 and hitting the bull at 100m...effortless. I then became bored with the heavy complicated contraption and went back to my 60# Longbow which was much lighter(bow mass and draw) smoother, and SIMPLER. I do extend my sincere thanks to the fella that let me shoot his toy and saving me a grand. 

People ramble...it's a forum...redirect as necessary.

I'm a little skittish on ABS in general as they don't have any hard data on the spine deflection of their shafts. I'd like to see what the safari shafts deflect to please! Don't tell me what I need for my bow off a chart alone....that's half the reason I'm into the high FOC game in the first place. Big acronyms don't impress me although high FOC arrows are fun to play with. I bet you can kill just as many animals without it as you can with it. WDM Bell Vs. Lott. In this situation they seem to be slamming the two theories together. 

Funny thing: They've got this ad on their website about the bow...click on it and it takes you to a page that has a sign with speed kills on it and a red circle and slash. 279fps ultra bow..no wait UFOEC depleted uranium aerial torpedos. Texas two step advertising... Quick Quick...SLow SLow


----------



## ozarksbuckslaye (Jul 24, 2008)

Forrest Halley said:


> Who is making a 55 gr broadhead?


Archers Choice makes a 55gr 3 blade fixed head with a 1" cut called a Speed Pro.Rocket makes a 57 grain expandable that looks similar to their Steelheads called a Wolverine 3.


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

So much for keeping it fun here and have a casual conversation. Makes me wonder how many newbies stick around after the posturing going on here. Sharp your point about the advertising is understood but you know here in the Northeast we don't buy anything till we kick it around some. So let's look at this bow from a different angle please, let's use Blacky's numbers which in fact are linked to on the ABS site, so they are not hiding anything. From Blacky's numbers it's a decent performing longbow, it's faster than most longbows and very close to most recurves if not better. The carbon used to make the bow, make an extremely light bow that "should" outlive any wood laminate bow. I don't give a dope on the advertising that's for suckers to be amazed at.


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

The original post was about a longbow, not bowhunting. People have been known to use longbows for more than just shooting animals (shocking, I know). Heck, the testing was advertised as IBO. It seems the IBO has a little something to do with 3D archery. As far as the company name goes, so what? I shoot target and 3D with ICS Bowhunter shafts. I suppose I best stop that, since the name clearly states they should only be used on animals (tongue firmly in cheek now). 

Is the advertising deceptive? Probably. I saw a Rage ad where the guy said it was like "throwing an axe through an animal." I've never seen an axe with only a 2" cutting diameter, and as we all know, sometimes that head doesn't get "through" the animal. :wink:


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

Longstick ... It is sad that nearly any topic here will get dragged into the same o' rhetoric and mudslinging ... 

It is obvious that a lot of topics now are just not worth bringing up here any more .

A pity .


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

J. Westbrock

Isn't that a wonderful advertisement, very bold statement by Rage, no doubt this was tested against a real axe, lol

Honestly anyone in the game long enough knows to not pay too much attention to this nonsense. Just looks at what some bowyers claim about their bows, it's just bait, it's up to you know whether or not to nibble. Can't believe how upset some get over what is being marketed, try looking at the compound world, they'll make you feel as if you are not going to shoot your best unless you use the latest and greatest.


----------



## trapperDave (Mar 12, 2005)

make a longbow or recurve that shoots 10gpp above 200 fps...then you can brag about it being fast. Hasnt happened yet

got 500 fps from a recurve...
Don Brown 1992.mp4


----------



## BowmanJay (Jan 1, 2007)

vabowdog said:


> Ken, would have to agree 110%,Alaska bowhunting supply talks about shooting 5gpp at 250???? Jim belcher had a wooden riser recurve 2 years ago that could do the exact same speed for half the cost. I get sick of all the speed hype with trad archery I thought that's why we left the wheely world?? My hunting setup is 11 gpp getting an amazingly quiet 177 fps and I killed 5 deer last year with it from directly under my stand all the way out to 30 yards with none jumping the string.
> 
> 
> Dewayne


I agree, I used to post in the compound forums that you will only miss faster! Everyone is so concerned about speed, but not as much concerned about proper form and making a good shot. It is nothing but sales silliness to keep up with the jones. That is what has been happeing in the compound world for years now, the bows themselves havent changed in design much, just continue to add a bit more speed and everyone goes crazy because they have to go buy the newer bow.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

i find myself in total agreement with Trapper Dave


----------



## Nam Nguyen (Jan 29, 2011)

doesn't impress me


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

A well designed selfbow will shoot around 240 fps IBO (Marc St. Louis recurve designed for flight shooting). I desperately want to get a chronograph to test the speeds of my hybrid longbows (made of simple oak, maple, and fiberglass) because just with a little care in designing the form they shoot plenty fast, and are cheap!

Truth is, longbows have the potential to out perform recurves due to the allowance for more narrow outer limbs. Recurves require more, by nature, because of the contact beyond the nocks. The trick is the matter of stored energy and vibration. Shorter limbs, greater preload... it's more about design than materials. It isn't until you're looking to start squeezing the last few fps out to just make a fast bow for giggles that materials matter. 

What I want to know is at what point does the invest make for a more STABLE bow? Is the carbon superior to aluminum for holding on target through the shot? There are plenty of ways to tweak for speed, but I want to see more folks designing for accuracy without having to shoot a 6' long Oly rig. Now that would be a bow...


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

I love and I'm intrigued about pushing the limits of bow design. It's not much different than how I feel about pushing the human body to it's limits in competition.

What I'm not interested is pushing the limits of a design where it fails somewhere else.

I want to have the most efficient and fastest limbs available but not at the sacrifice of loosing stability that effects my accuracy in a negative way.

There should be NOTHING wrong with having a desire to create or want a fast bow...but speed should not be the only desirable quality within a bow.

Ray :shade:


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

kegan said:


> What I want to know is at what point does the invest make for a more STABLE bow? Is the carbon superior to aluminum for holding on target through the shot? There are plenty of ways to tweak for speed, but I want to see more folks designing for accuracy without having to shoot a 6' long Oly rig. Now that would be a bow...


Exactly!!!

A lot of the new trad bows that have been hyped for their speed remind me of the speed bows (compounds) of 20 years ago. Back then, hatchet cams, reflexed risers, short brace heights, and overdraws were common. Yes, they were fast, but twitchy as hell. 

Speed is nice. I like fast bows. But if they're no more stable than a 5-year-old on a sugar high, I'll take a pass.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Stability is one of the best reasons to use carbon in limbs, but only if its in the right place. Fast limbs which are unstable aren't very useful except for bragging rights.

On the other hand there are manufacturers who are producing both very fast limbs and also very stable limbs (Border and a few others). Torsional and vertical stability has a large effect on the shot, plus in some cases you can shoot a significantly lighter spined shaft.

You will find that most high level FITA shooters have their limbs somewhere in the middle of the preload range specifically because they loose stability as they are cranked in. They also don't shoot arrows under 6-7gpp because once the arrow is past around 210fps it gets harder to tune. They shoot heavier weights just because the heavier arrows with greater FOC are more stable downrange, 12-15% is common.

-Grant

-Grant


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

Grant

Right on about Carbon, if used correctly it can make a difference. I have a Border Griffin Longbow, Carbon no Glass, haven't tested it with a chrono and dont care to, it's the best longbow I have. Sid is an amazing bowyer.


----------



## Boberau (Dec 15, 2009)

I'm not sure where we are going here, genlemen. Most every thread that mentions arrows below 8 gpp get closed and deleted because of our reverence to Lord Dr. Ashby and Alaska Bowhunting Supply. The last thread that got closed on this subject went to where some life long ignorant person insisted that anybody shooting any arrow out of their bow with less than 9 gpp would have their bow blow up on them. When I demonstrated that 7 gpp retained sufficient energy in the arrow rather than the bow and could, indeed be shot, our life long ignorant person closed the tread rather than have his good buddy, the Lord Dr. Ashby witness such heresy.

Now, this thread! ... And, as usual, Sharp is wrong in every way... (according to the enlightened ones).

Here's my opinion. (1) I'm mighty glad I think for myself and am able to test things for myself without relying on the "enlightened ones" on the internet. (2) most of what I have learned about archery was way before there was ever an internet, thank the Good Lord (and I ain't talking about the Lord Dr. Ashby when I talk about the Good Lord).


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Boberau said:


> I'm not sure where we are going here, genlemen. Most every thread that mentions arrows below 8 gpp get closed and deleted because of our reverence to Lord Dr. Ashby and Alaska Bowhunting Supply. The last thread that got closed on this subject went to where some life long ignorant person insisted that anybody shooting any arrow out of their bow with less than 9 gpp would have their bow blow up on them. When I demonstrated that 7 gpp retained sufficient energy in the arrow rather than the bow and could, indeed be shot, our life long ignorant person closed the tread rather than have his good buddy, the Lord Dr. Ashby witness such heresy.
> 
> Now, this thread! ... And, as usual, Sharp is wrong in every way... (according to the enlightened ones).
> 
> Here's my opinion. (1) I'm mighty glad I think for myself and am able to test things for myself without relying on the "enlightened ones" on the internet. (2) most of what I have learned about archery was way before there was ever an internet, thank the Good Lord (and I ain't talking about the Lord Dr. Ashby when I talk about the Good Lord).


Isn't it usually the most prudent thing to shoot a arrow weight the manufacturer of the bow suggest ?

I mean..in all reality...some of these companies are just trying to draw away some of the compound crowd anyway..My 29" xx 78 2315 with it's 175 grain tip drawn to 28" @ 66 lbs shoots right at 190 fps. How much faster do I need to make it that will feel any better in my hand..be more quieter..more accurate..more capable of taking any animal I choose to cleanly out to any distance I choose to shoot at it ? Unless we are all going to shoot at 50 yards and up..how much of an improvement is a 200 fps bow going to give me since I don't use pins/peeps or gap shoot on a deer size animal or even bigger ? I can see on small size animals at those distances like a ground squirrel or prairie dog..but I don't hunt them that far away..Also..trying to get use to a much lower bow hand position is a real PITA too...I mean for all practical purposes in a hunting world..having a faster bow can be a real advantage..I know that...but..if speed is the primary desire..wouldn't shooting a new compound be more practical ? 

To impress me...the bow has to 

1) be dead quite..
2) be smoother than my E.Hoyt bow at my draw
3) Feel and balance as good in my hand and through out the shot process as what I am shooting now does
4) No hand shock
5) Not load up faster in the first 1/2 of draw..as what mine does now
6) Shoot my same 602 grain arrow weight much much faster..
7) Look better to me than what I have now..(personal)

Otherwise I'm not impressed..and certainly can't see myself rushing out and spending a lot for it..Now...if it looked like a Groves Spitfire..or Black Widow take down...that in itself would get me to at least try to get one in my hand...:wink:

Mac


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

Boberau

Sorry but I didn't create this thread to preach Ashbyism or ABS greatness, it's supposed to be about the bow. Some people don't think the numbers they posted have value, Ok I'm good with that but let's stick with Blacky's numbers. Pretty decent numbers from a bow that will probably outlast any laminate bow, that was my point. The numbers are decent enought to consider better than most recurves. Sorry I dont have any impiral data to prove it, just my experience.


----------



## Forrest Halley (Jul 24, 2011)

They say the bow can be dry fired for a week without breaking it...cool for folks that want to go super light on the arrows or are interested in super tough equipment.
The fact that it doesn't make 279 in any test we've got the imperial data...sketchy, but I can live with it.
Will they guarantee it under 8 GPP? If so get one and pluck the heck out of it...if that's what you want.
I think I'll order one at 100 pounds and get some really light arrows just to tease the compound folks. Should be amazing at around 300fps....from a long bow! I don't know what the highest weight they will tak an order on so I'm kidding around here.

What I'd like is for everybody to just debate the issue without being rude to others or pompous about anything. I personally don't care if someone posts and is an expert or not or if their idea is good or not. The forum exists to spread information and debate the quality and correctness of it. It's most helpful if done with respect for the other person whether you feel that they deserve it or not at the time. Each post is entertainment in some form, but be nice about it or just lurk quietly. Please and Thank You.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

Actually in the Olympic circles foam core limbs are known to wear out faster then wood core. However it is unlikely that any traditional archer would ever fire enough arrows to wear out composite limbs regardless of the core materials.

-Grant


----------



## marc weier (May 26, 2009)

I find it funny that this bow is exactly 1 FPS faster than the Bear takedown that was tested last month and nobody is talking about the Bear being a super fast bow. Think I would rather have 2 Bear takedowns than 1 Qarbon Nano for the same money.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

Boberau, I'm not really sure where the heavy arrow preaching is coming from, I certianly don't think that's the dominant mindset here. I suspect most of us are shooting lighter arrows. Mine are around 8 gpp, and sometimes a little lighter if I have a bow around that's abnormally heavy.

Anyway, Marc makes a good point. Lots of equal speed bows out there, and personally I think we're getting the best compromise in speed and ease of tune at the moment. So now the goal can be to balance that speed with increased stability and durability.

What intrigues me is the comments about the greater durability of carbon over more conventional wood and fiberglass. Here's what I wonder: is the increase in durability something most folks would be able to actually take advantage of? Would we SEE the difference outside competition where shooting extremely light arrows (ie 5 gpp) over and over is the norm? The cost of building my wood and fiberglass hybrids is actually very fair but if the cost of using carbon or other synthetics would lead to a bow that could survive armegedon... it would definately be something to consider!


----------



## Boberau (Dec 15, 2009)

kegan, sorry... I was "venting." ... and, my little story about closing out the thread was not at Archery Talk ...

Well, actually, I'm not sorry... That's a figure of speech for me... Truth is, it's important to keep an open mind. And, that seems to be a reason I'm over here at Archery Talk. ....


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

Kegan
For me the only explanation of this bow's cost is the cost of materials used. A carbon bow can probably survive anything we normally throw at it plus a bit more. They way I look at it, ABS is the first to produce this for the Trad world. They most likely will not be the last. And when that happens the price will drop and I suspect more than one person who was against it because of the price will probably buy it. I really don't think ABS is selling this bow at this price because of speed. Someone here mentioned that Jim Belcher had a recurve post better numbers. Jim Belcher helped design this bow as well. And if you know Jim he doesn't build crap.


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

I'm not objecting to the cost, the riser being solid carbon can't be cheap for them to produce. I was wondering if the durability of the carbon bow would outlive a bow that is built more commonly. I'm wording this wrong I think. Let me try this:

Will this bow survive three times longer than a bow costing $400-$700? I know, a bit of an extreme question, but if it did that $1400 price tag wouldn't be so extreme. If this bow could handle abuse that would otherwise destroy regular bows than it might be onto something. Good speed but incredible durability. I'm curious if most archers really push the envelope enough to make the increased durability economical?

Boberau- no need to apologize about venting, but I thought you were refering to here. Lots of folks bickering these days but I don't there are enough people shooting one style of gear to form an elitist gang to run folks off. Like I said before, I think there are just as many folks shooting light weight arrows as heavy. Besides, we all know 7 gpp worked fine for Howard Hill, and he was fairly "traditional" I would suppose


----------



## LongStick64 (Aug 29, 2009)

If we are going to just focus on cost, the 1400 fr the Qarbon Nano looks a bit easier to swallow than a Habu costing 1850.00


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

LongStick64 said:


> If we are going to just focus on cost, the 1400 fr the Qarbon Nano looks a bit easier to swallow than a Habu costing 1850.00


And I still have trouble accepting over $1000 for a BW bow, but that's just me. I'm just curious about the cost of materials vs. longevity and whether the average archer could even take advantage of the differences?


----------



## swamprooter (Jul 27, 2007)

*Bar of measurement.*

As an owner of a Nano, this thread caught my attention obviously. After wading through the posts, there seems to be an issue with some in the argument of "why the light arrows" "ABS is a company that promotes heavy arrows" and so on. All bow companies measure their bow performance against two bodies of standards..IBO and AMO. ABS happens to use the IBO standard measure in this marketing ad. The IBO standard SPECS "light arrows" as a benchmark. Us hunters may call these light arrows but it is what IBO SPECS. It is what it is. 

They have a shooting machine on location and are constantly testing their arrows,bh and bows. Not to mention the technology assistance they get from Win & Win and Belcher. I personally was attracted to the bow from the all carbon aspect. Have any of you priced a chunk of carbon recently at ACE Hardware ? As a garage bowyer myself, i couldnt ever imagine cutting a set of limbs off my press this true as Win & Win has done for them. But in honesty....thats what the Koreans do.. they make bows like we make produce Fords.

I have been extremely pleased with their broadheads also. They give a lifetime warrenty. Thats pretty good in my book. I rather return a head to a company like this than get on a chat board and sling crap. Cant think how many Zwicky tips i have curled in last 30 years. 

just my thoughts


----------



## swamprooter (Jul 27, 2007)

Trapper Dave.. FYI.....i made a bow that will shoot AMO ...218fps... thats 60# 540gr 30".......if i increased the weight to 600grains then it should decrease the speed by 10fps for 208 fps....which would be above your 10gpp 200fps... My bow was tested on a Hooters Bow machine with a Truball release by a third party. This bow was made with Red elm and clear glass 61" TD in 1996.........................so there are bows out there that will do it.


----------



## trapperDave (Mar 12, 2005)

...should...


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

if you want to check out stabilty, then your probably needing a deflexed riser, so that the bow is less prone to torque on release.
you also want a bow that is not like a noodle. We call it vertical stability. Push and pull the string up and down inline with itself. Try this one different bows and you will find the ones prone to a dragging top or bottom finger. or out of norm hand pressure.
The only other thing is how stable the limbs are at brace height... continious "D" shape limbs dont need to be stable left and right for exactly the same reason a trailor follows a car all day. when you go reflexed at brace height, you start to need it. Any bow that the tip is infront of the string contact area will have the same effect as pushing a trailor. It will be prone to wobbling due to the release.

This controls the left/right and up/down path of the nock induced from the release.

some of the Ultra fast bows struggle with these... Thats the trick in making a great bow in our books. Massive stability, up/down and left right at the nocking point.

just wish someone would post those numbers and then it would be clear for all to see whats been sacrificed to the gain of another aspect.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

I was inspired to look this up after Onesharp said on LW a Recuve wont ever reach 300fps, I posted this on another Forum of a traditional Turkish Horn bow shooting through a chrono at 357fps, the bow is used for flight archery.

The problem with pushing these kinds of speeds, is it even usable for 3D/Field Tourney or Bowhunting, what kind of accuracy and consistency are you going to get. The speeds are possible, it's now just a matter of building the stability into the bow design.

Our goal in this sport is about hitting what you aim at,finding that balanced combination of solid Form, respectable speed and stable bow setup is what does it for me.:thumbs_up


----------



## kegan (Aug 28, 2006)

For the record, the 10 gpp and 200 fps marker are with a 28" draw. Longer draws will of course add speed.


----------



## deadeyedickwc (Jan 10, 2010)

well put bowman to many think fast is good most can't hit a target with fast ,form is the key to a good shooter with out it you have nothing


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

I would like to see Blacky review a bow that is shot with fingers 28" draw recurve, longbow, or selfbow that is 200fps with an arrow that is 10gpp


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

http://www.atarn.org/islamic/akarpowicz/turkish_bow_tests.htm

Turkish bow link with test results,some big fps numbers in there, not to mention drawweights


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Kegan, I persanally dont see longbows keeping up with recurves.

Narrow limbs are just half the battle, but stored energy is the land of recurves.
even the longest limbs in the longbow world cannot store what is capable with a recurve.

Take A&H's data on DFC's
Hes putting hybrids up with recurves. and i would agree, moderate recurves are just that, Moderate.
If you want to push recurve technology you have to get smart. im not talking the subties of static designs vs working designs, or anything like that.
Im talking HUGE long preload thats simply not possible with longbows.
yeah, longbows are simple to see and visalise and model. but trying to hot rod a recurve is a different game.









im talking about shifting the inflection point (change over point from dropping rate of lbs grown to growing rate of lbs grown.)

If you take the lbs per inch, most moderate recurves and advanced hybrids will have to be subjected to a point where you start to hit stack. (more than the average lbs pulled per inch)

Lets run though some numbers.
40lbs at 28" and an 8" brace height = 20" of power stroke, giving 2lbs per inch. if your pulling 2.1lbs per inch, and growing, 2.2lbs in the next inch, your hitting stack.
If your dropping your still in preload. 3lbs - 2.6lbs etc. 

Here is a graph that shows the pattern that is not available to longbow designs or even moderate recurves.









Its this advanatge that allowed us to take OL's flight records off him. 
our ILF terget limbs on a hoyt 23" riser and X10's just set a ladies world record for flight for a sub 50lbs target bow. with a distance of 453.73m (496yds 0yds 9in). set here in the UK with no high altitute advantage that you get in Salt lake..


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

now my next grumble is this GPP number being the holly grail, and how that compairs to longevity of a bow.
Gpp is just one aspect of the impact a bow recieves. Let me try and explain.
Lets say Bow A shoots an 7gpp arrow at 210fps. and bow B shoots it at 220fps.
so the later bow shot the arrow 10 fps faster, which at 2fps per lbs puts bow B at 5lbs more punch. if you add 5lbs to the 7gpp, you will most probably find that the 7gpp becomes 6.5gpp for bow B based on its performance. 
Just like draw weight is a poor (but best we have) indicator of arrow spine its also a poor reflection of energy in a bow.

The problem with ultra low GPP is the volume of power hitting the bow, and a faster bow gets slapped with more energy than the slower bow even if it has the same final draw weight!


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

here is someone elses smoothness graph.

This graph shows the drop in draw weight per inch as you pull the bow back
The lowest point on the graph is the smoothest point in the pull. its the inch where you pull the least pounds of growth in draw weight.

you can see that there is a ultra smooth draw leading to a big difference in stored energy.










This graph, shows you that even advanced recurves have a huge way to go to get close to the levels of hot rod status that some of these longbows have gone to.

ontop of that, a glass recurve limb has about 3000 grains of mass to it, these high energy recurves have approx 2100 grains of mass to them. so not only big on the energy front, also light in weight too...

dont throw recurves out just yet


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

MAC 11700 said:


> 2) be smoother than my E.Hoyt bow at my draw
> 
> Mac


hows this for smoothness.









and











one is a 60" ILF (17" riser)
the other is a 70" modern target bow...
The 60" is heavier. AND smoother.


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

Borderbows said:


> hows this for smoothness.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


WOW.....Thank You...I know what I am saving for now...That is awesome to say the least..


Mac


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Steve none of those turkish bows are shooting a 10gpp of draw arrow over 200fps and some of them are even drawing more than 28" and they were shot with a machine. I would like to see an independent test of a recurve or longbow that can shoot a 10gpp of draw arrow drawn to 28" with fingers shoot an arrow 200fps.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Blacky states that in his experience he looses 5fps finger shot. if you managed the 203fps at those specs, Id bag up the technology and start selling bows. 
We beat the 9gpp 200fps back in 2004 on a production level
We acheive this with a FULL carbon recurve limb with 13 years of R&D. 90 years of combined of bow making experience... 
But we do aim to get two arrows to land close to each other...
We do also have the credit of currently holding 10 world records in flight shootin with our bows thanks to Mike, and Janice Wilrich and Cherry Lyne 2010 and 2011. you can look this up.

Id think the 200fps with 10gpp at 28" is possible, but i doubt it with glass. but then i could be wrong. bows are very complicated.

with beaver balls, finger shot, and a high brace height, Pete ward acheived 197fps with 8.9gpp from hex5's and 1gpp more would workd out to be about 10fps less. We have gained about 4-5fps with the hex6 so there is reason to think we might be close. (race spec) no beaver balls, loose nock fit, good tune, centre shot, etc etc.
Drop the BH and gain 2fps, drop the beaver balls and gain 2-3fps puts us at 201-202fps finger shot. at 8.9gpp, Take 10fps off for the aditional arrow mass, you are shy of the 10gpp by 8fps. This with the hex6 puts us 4fps shy. 

just to give you some idea of how far things are being pushed!

but it does also depend on your release.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Like I said - I would like to see an independent test demonstrate that a finger shot recurve or longbow drawn to 28" can shoot a 10gpp of draw arrow 200 fps. It may be possible - but there are no independent tests that I know of that have demonstrated this.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Sharpbroadhead just consider we're basically talking about Primitive Bows with no modern glues or materials, it impressed me at least.

I think Belcher\Sky bows has hit the 200fps and 10gpp mark, I'll have to look it up to confirm it though.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

http://www.belcherbows.com/video_2.htm

Just looked as Jims SSR Recurve video, shooting offthe shelfwith fingers, 62# and 606g arrow and around 204fps,through double chrono's, it was a while since I saw the clip so I was pretty close.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

tell him to send that bow to Blacky for some independent tests


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> tell him to send that bow to Blacky for some independent tests


I dont really know Jim or if he's even interested in sending his bows away, being owner of Belcher bows and now Sky Archery, with that pedigree behind him I doubt he even needs Blacky to promote/confirm anything. I did know Jim's Dad, Jack Belcher a great UK Bowyer of Hill style Longbows and also made some nice Recurves.

Just good to see Bowyers like Sid and Jim pushing the perfomance boundries for the everyday Archer.


----------



## trapperDave (Mar 12, 2005)

thats sill not 10 gpp


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

That Belcher is definitely a fast bow, but look at the video with the hooter shooter going for IBO speed, it was ~259.

Either Jim draws more then 28" (which is hard to tell as his draw and loose are very quick in that video) or the bow picks-up a lot more efficiency with the heavier arrows then most bows do. I personally suspect its a combo of his vary dynamical loose and also a possibly slightly longer draw length.

I know talking with flight shooters the loose is the most critical skill in flight shooting and can account easily for 10fps.

-Grant


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Its well docutmanted that to gain 4fps is a significant step forward when looking at top end bows.

here are 2 quotes from a long thread held back in 2008 between my dad and OL.

from Sid
"One point OL refferes to the tests done by John Havard on HEX4 giving an almost AMO of 197 fps if I recall well, arrows were over heavy by 5 grains. This was done nearly 5 years ago. Since then we have introduced the new laminates that are around 200 grains lighter and double the torsional stiffness and so that must put the equivqlemt limb today at 200fps and the HEX5 above have more stored energy. "

Fron OL
"Sid, If the numbers you had were 197, that had to be for 28", my old notes shows AMO of 205 (30")which fits in with the best of the best. The BD also had the highest se/pdf we've seen to date. Yep, there are a lot more ways to screw up the stability of a bow attempting to gain performance then right ways to do it but to hear some talk about the "stability" of straight limbed longbows, recurves should be totally unshootable! And we know that's not true. I see arguments of accuracy and stability used as detours from non-subjective hard factors that can be measured therefore can't be argued. Kind of like the democrats, change the subject to touchy feely stuff when hard facts hurt!  "

Taken from:
http://leatherwall.bowsite.com/tf/lw/thread2.cfm?forum=23&threadid=180510&messages=97&CATEGORY=3

Somehow in the last 3 years we havent taken signifcant steps forward... 
our thinking is that 1gpp is alot.

Here is the last post on that thread which i think sums up some data. Bows are marked at 28", but what are they being pulled to...

"10 gpi and 201fps now that is some speed! One of the problem I have with speed statements is there is never a base to them. 

Earlier I was under the mistake that a set of limbs AMO at 197 fps but OL says (author of the test) that that was at 28" at 30" it lifted to 205 fps a jumb of 8 fps. 

10 gpi is one thing and you will get one speed at 28" another at 29" and so a draw length needs to be known also for that to actually mean something? "


----------

