# Super Recurves?



## marcelxl (Dec 5, 2010)

Hey guys,

I have gone up a class in gear and a nice Dryad package….. riser, ACS XL longbow limbs and some ACS recurve limbs.

I have to be honest, I have never felt anything like those recurves! even at my 30" draw, I feel no stacking - almost a let off, it's a revelation!

Anyway, I will not be really shooting them until after hunting season as they are touch light, I got them for 3D really!

So, as I dip my toes into these waters, can anyone share their experiences of these or similar limbs and getting the best out of them?

I hear that they like shorter brace heights, anyone else found this?

Thanks in advance

Marc


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

They are great for expanding at release. Depending on the model, you could pull anywhere from 0.6 to 1.5 pounds/inch at 28 inches, which also pushes out the stacking point. That makes getting that last 1/8 inch very easy. 

I am not sure about other models, but Border is designed to be vertically stable at low brace heights. You have to adjust how you tune. You may need to go lower in brace height to solve problems where you would normally go higher. Don't think about string slap. 

The lower brace height is going to provide more stored energy and speed.

I have shot everything from HEX4 to HEX7. The changes between models is remarkable. I have also shot the Uukha but they were a bit heavy for me and could not really get the full impact of the feel. I have never shot Dryad.


----------



## marcelxl (Dec 5, 2010)

Thanks,

I have shot decent limbs for a while such as mid-range Tradtechs, some Winex etc. For me both set of limbs have been a revelation! I have played with the longbow limbs a little and they seem as speedy as any recurve I have owned but those recurves are mind blower! 
Back in the UK, I have buddy and once drew his Hex (5's I think they were) and I was amazed then, I seem to recall he had his brace some around 6" and that was on a bare bow riser……… he knows what he is doing too. 
Gonna be a fun 3D season and excited about learning more about and tuning these beauties as my arrows just came in………..as soon as I get over this stupid form flaw I'm gonna tune the hell out of them.


----------



## centershot (Sep 13, 2002)

I'm intrigued by them but not enough to drop the money they command at this point. No place to try them around here (probably a good thing) but I sure would like to give them a thorough test one day.


----------



## Greencb (Jul 8, 2008)

I am trying to decide between hex 7 and Some dryad legend recurve limbs now. Do you set up tiller different for Border limbs? Are both limbs even vs one heavier limb?


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

I've shot the hex 6 and 7 as well as the ACS limb - they are all good limbs. I've found they like to be set very very close to center shot and even tiller (for me)


----------



## DaveWood (Aug 28, 2015)

New here and not so educated yet, - What is a super recurve?


----------



## Greencb (Jul 8, 2008)

Any notable differences between hex 6, 7 and ACS


----------



## PSUBowhunter (Jul 10, 2006)

Borders, dryads, morrison, uukha, Bigfoot and zipper (probably a few others as well) all make a "super limb". I've shot most of them, except the uukhas and they all have their own feel, but are all great. I currently have a sex of morrison max3s, and plan to order a set of the zipper z4 limbs. 

They do brace though, so a reflexed riser definitely helps with accuracy.


----------



## PSUBowhunter (Jul 10, 2006)

Spell check doesn't like deflexed


----------



## rembrandt (Jan 17, 2004)

DaveWood said:


> New here and not so educated yet, - What is a super recurve?


They are intriguing with extreme recurves. I would like to try some on my ILF bow....When you see a recurve and imagine that curved about twice that much then you see a super recurve....Maybe some on here can show you a photo....


----------



## PSUBowhunter (Jul 10, 2006)

The right limb is a tradtech limbs(standard recurve), the left limb is a morrison max3 limb (super recurve)


----------



## Matt_Potter (Apr 13, 2010)

Greencb said:


> Any notable differences between hex 6, 7 and ACS


Biggest difference I noticed was the hex series had more vertical stability than the ACS which isn't that big a deal unless your string-walking


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

The Super Recurve 



Unstrung


----------



## Beendare (Jan 31, 2006)

Hey Marcel....how does the bow sound compared to your other winex/tradtech limbs? Louder...quieter?


----------



## DaveWood (Aug 28, 2015)

Thanks - I see what you mean! Cool!


----------



## marcelxl (Dec 5, 2010)

Beendare said:


> Hey Marcel....how does the bow sound compared to your other winex/tradtech limbs? Louder...quieter?


Hard to say yet as I have not really done anything other than set a tiller a loose a few (I am sticking with my hunter right now…….and it's killing me!)

However, Mrs B has hers pretty much set and it sounds remarkably quiet and well, just positive. Really impressive so far and all she has done is tweaked it into her existing arrows and it's putting a massive smile on her face!


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

My experience is only with the Border Covert Hunter (Bolt down Hex 7 limbs with dedicated, limb specific riser). It is also only my experience. If I say 'you', I really mean 'I', and perhaps 'you'. Qualification made.

It is a different kind of animal. There are things that _I_ like about it, but that doesn't make it inherently superior or inferior for anybody else. Some people love them, some people find them kind of a neat novelty, some people flat out hate them, and some seem to have a personal vendetta 

The draw at the back end is so smooth, stack at the end feels non-existent. 

This can be good, in that it makes it very comfortable, even encourages an archer, perhaps, to expand. Hanging out at full draw feels relatively comfortable, even compared to conventional limbs at the same weight. It's not that the draw is easier, because technically speaking, it's harder. More load in the front, so you're actually doing more work at a given holding weight. However, what you don't have is the same degree of _increase_ on the back end, so it doesn't feel as 'stiff'. I like it. However, if you're not used to this, it may take some acclimation. It may also be something you decide you would rather do without.

First, the ease of expansion, if you're used to really cranking to pull through to full expansion (PULL THROUGH THE SHOT!), it can be relatively easier to overdraw. If I extend myself to the degree that I did with my other recurves to get to full expansion, it doesn't go so well. You don't feel a building wall, so you keep going, and can actually break out of alignment. In other words, if you try to use the stack to break the shot, you're going to be pulling, and waiting, and pulling... I actually had to tell myself to stop trying so hard. Yes, you're at full draw, relax, take your time, and focus on the shot process, particularly relaxing those fingers. You're not going to yank them off the string the same way you did with another bow... leading to...

Second, related to the smoothness of the draw, you really need to relax your fingers more. If a heavy draw weight was previously masking a bad release, a smoother draw isn't going to help anything.

So far, having shot one for about a year, the bow (for a moderately short hunting style bow anyway, which is what I shoot), seems to be really forgiving of imperfect releases. I've done extensive testing with imperfect releases 

I don't know if it's related to the limbs, but it isn't particularly forgiving of bow arm flinching, premature dropping, or otherwise bow arm flailing. I don't know that it's any more picky than my other recurves in this regard, but I also don't think that any degree of torsional stability is going to help an unstable bow arm  I do wonder sometimes if feeling relatively relaxed with little subjective tension causes me to relax my bow arm in ways, or more, than is optimal. When I focus on keeping my bow arm solid, things seem to go well. If I kind of space out and go straight to the Zen side, without thinking about doing the Steve Morley 'Reach out to the target' thing, the groups open up, and sometimes there's a bonafide flyer.

As for additional noise or difficulty of tuning, that's an interesting topic, and I don't have answers. It seems that the experience varies a lot from person to person, and situation to situation.

My Covert Hunter, with a couple pieces of velcro at the braced string lift points, minimal silencers, and limb saver dampeners, seems really quiet to me. By comparison, it also seems more tiller tolerant compared to my wife's 35# hex 7 limbs, mounted on an ILF Hoyt Excel. I can vary my hand pressure and string draw placement a whole lot on my covert hunter, and I don't feel any riser nodding or wobble. The ILF limbs, by comparison, seem more prone to variation. Set with an even tiller, and a high grip, the riser stays stable when I draw back. My wife, though, uses a low grip, and before we adjusted tiller for her shooting, the limbs were pretty loud. Once we got the tiller adjusted, going 1/4 turn on each, each direction, it behaved a lot better. Still, though, while I wouldn't say they're loud, they're not as quiet as my Covert Hunter. We haven't really got her bow dialed in yet. Rough tiller and nock height and bare shafting is all we did. She wants to leave it alone for awhile as she gets to know it, and I think that's a good plan.

As for difficulty of tuning, I think that kind of depends on who is tuning it, and how they want to tune it. For us basic shooters, who pretty much shoot pretty conventionally, tune for good bare shaft flight, and leave it alone, it doesn't seem that difficult to me and others I've known. However, it does seem that while some people can make them work fine, some other competitive shooters get frustrated trying to get them tuned very specifically. I'm thinking about bare bow archers in particular, or others who not only tune, but direct the tune not just for bare shaft or broad head flight, but for tweaking launch direction as it relates to getting a shorter point on distance, string walking, or what have you. Most of the complaints I've heard seem to be in that realm anyway, and I have to add, it's out of my range of expertise 

So, in summary, they're different. They have a cool factor. There are potential benefits. There are potential draw backs. There are no easy answers


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Trad archers tend to tune to what they see. They are not as numbers driven.
Thise that are numbers driven tend to get a little confused by non conventional numbers. 

That said. There have been all levels of gold, silvers and bronzes held at more than one world event by more than one archer. In instinctive classes and barebow classes with super recurves.

Covert hunter ladies silver
Hex6 bb2s currently hold gents barebow gold
Instinctive gents silver and bronze with hex6s.
That was only one event.


Once you get out the negativity of some forums you find people are getting on quite well.







BarneySlayer said:


> My experience is only with the Border Covert Hunter (Bolt down Hex 7 limbs with dedicated, limb specific riser). It is also only my experience. If I say 'you', I really mean 'I', and perhaps 'you'. Qualification made.
> 
> It is a different kind of animal. There are things that _I_ like about it, but that doesn't make it inherently superior or inferior for anybody else. Some people love them, some people find them kind of a neat novelty, some people flat out hate them, and some seem to have a personal vendetta
> 
> ...


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Borderbows said:


> Trad archers tend to tune to what they see. They are not as numbers driven.
> Thise that are numbers driven tend to get a little confused by non conventional numbers.
> 
> That said. There have been all levels of gold, silvers and bronzes held at more than one world event by more than one archer. In instinctive classes and barebow classes with super recurves.
> ...


I certainly do not perform at that level, though I notice that the biggest variable for me is me, not any particular tuning variable. Fatigue from prior activity, lack of sleep, lack of food or water, mental distractions, I have a harder time doing what I need to do, and when it doesn't do what I want, I can feel my screw up. When I know I made a good shot, it drops right in. In the rare moments that I'm really on, the accuracy is kind of creepy, almost viper multi-fletchtype creepy


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Here is the evolution of the super recurve by Border. I have not yet retaken this shot with the HEX7. The bottom three limbs are HEX4, HEX5 and HEX6. This HEX7 are a huge change from the HEX6.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Here are a couple of charts that show how a super recurve is different. The first show the first derivative of the draw force curve for three different bow geometries: longbow, conventional recurve, and super recurve. You can see how the super recurve pushes out the minimum pound/inch point to around 28 inches. The lower chart is a measure the bow leverage. A recurve gets longer as you pull it, up to the point where the string loses contact with the limbs. At that point the bow starts compressing and stacking starts to occur. This correlates with the first derivative curve.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Here is a comparison of smoothness (first derivative of the DFC) and energy/weight on the fingers (ability of the bow to store energy). You can see how the smoothness has changed with each generation. This is seen in the minimum pounds/inch. Energy per weight on the fingers is pretty constant until the HEX7, which really was a revolutionary leap forward. All of the HEX family of limbs store energy on the high side compared to other limbs I have tested. The HEX7 are 35 pounds. These particular measures are fairly independent of draw weight and are good for bow comparisons.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Hank... the 7.5 is a step up again.

:-D


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

I'm excited


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Sid,

I am getting behind. My HEX6 are the original model, but they shoot really, really, good.

I can't imagine what a step up the 7.5 can be. You are already running 0.6 pounds/inch at 28 inches.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Take a look at Sid's post describing what a super recurve is.

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3120898


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Borderbows said:


> Hank... the 7.5 is a step up again.
> 
> :-D


Awesome.

Now I can tell people I'm using obsolete technology


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

BarneySlayer said:


> Awesome.
> 
> Now I can tell people I'm using obsolete technology


And back too "TRAD" you go!!! :laugh:


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

My HEX4's must really be trad now.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Which one of these are super?







Dan


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

All I can say is the Hex 6 is a much different limb than the 7 

I am very anxious to try a 7.5 

What impresses me the most is that the boys at Border don't rest on their Laurels 

They continually push on not relying on 30 year old limb designs 

Again they are not for everyone 

Either are Ferraris and Porsches 

But if cutting edge design is something you fancy they can be a viable option 

They won't help you kill more deer or score better in most cases but they bring a smile to my face like no other limb does


----------



## Zarrow (Sep 8, 2010)

Borderbows said:


> Hank... the 7.5 is a step up again.
> 
> :-D


So I should hold off on ordering Hex 7.5 ILF and CH?


----------



## marcelxl (Dec 5, 2010)

JParanee said:


> They won't help you kill more deer or score better in most cases but they bring a smile to my face like no other limb does


That was kinda my point! I got mine in 40# flavour just for 3D shooting and I cannot wait for the season the start now………….what is amazing is how they are at full draw.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Zarrow said:


> So I should hold off on ordering Hex 7.5 ILF and CH?


Border will continue to make upgrades on their limbs ..... It's their nature  

So feel free to jump in anytime but always know the sides will keep pushing 

I highly doubt the Hex 7.5 will make the 7 obsolete 

Just as the 7 didn't make the 6's obsolete ........just different


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

marcelxl said:


> That was kinda my point! I got mine in 40# flavour just for 3D shooting and I cannot wait for the season the start now………….what is amazing is how they are at full draw.


Yea I know what you mean 

Since I got my first CH I really haven't spent much time shooting anything else but the Hex 7's 

I pick up another for a video or something but it's always a thing of beauty when I pick up my CH


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Zarrow said:


> So I should hold off on ordering Hex 7.5 ILF and CH?


Timing is everything.
We have a 10 week wait list.
And we expect to start making 7.5s by christmas.

I dont think holding off is going to change much.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Which one of these are super?
> View attachment 3123658
> 
> Dan


None.
Are the tips 3" or more infront of the bow string at brace...
No bow without carbon TS that we have ever seen can be shot without serious training without fear of unstringing.
On the other hand. The CH and hex7s are 5" infront.ie. the tips are very very close to being inline withe the grip.

Thats a super recurve.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Here you can see how far the tips are infront of the bow string.

And is thats a 8" BH or more then you will see that recurve size is quite small


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Here is the precurser to the CH. The ghillie dhu.
Left is unstrung. Right is string. As you can see the tips are almost at the grip. These have 6.5" BH.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Hank, here, a 2002 Ep10, next to a 2011 Hex6 vs a 2014 hex7


----------



## olddogrib (Apr 4, 2014)

And we know Santa's going to bring that very first set to that darn lucky Joe....just kidding, the honeymoon hasn't begun to wear off for me and my used 6.5's, lol!


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Olddog

I hear Santas sleigh bells coming


----------



## Zarrow (Sep 8, 2010)

Borderbows said:


> Timing is everything.
> We have a 10 week wait list.
> And we expect to start making 7.5s by christmas.
> 
> I dont think holding off is going to change much.



Thanks Sid. I will probably be placing the order in a couple of weeks then.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Borderbows said:


> None.
> Are the tips 3" or more infront of the bow string at brace...
> No bow without carbon TS that we have ever seen can be shot without serious training without fear of unstringing.
> On the other hand. The CH and hex7s are 5" infront.ie. the tips are very very close to being inline withe the grip.
> ...


On the other thread you stated 2"? Doesn't it really depend on recommended preload?
Dan


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> On the other thread you stated 2"? Doesn't it really depend on recommended preload?
> Dan


the 2" is a normal recurve.

3" is the start of super recurve category in our opinion.

but its simple enough to measure. a second bow string and a tape measure of some description is all that's needed.

get the bow to its brace height, use the second string, and use it to draw a straight line from tip to tip. and measure the gap.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Borderbows said:


> the 2" is a normal recurve.
> 
> 3" is the start of super recurve category in our opinion.
> 
> ...


Thanks Sid. 
Uukha, state to have improved the curve in their standard line up. I have found them to be smoother than my other normal curve limbs , but not into the super level I guess?
Dan


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

Dan, I think you're pretty super


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Thanks Sid.
> Uukha, state to have improved the curve in their standard line up. I have found them to be smoother than my other normal curve limbs , but not into the super level I guess?
> Dan


another way to define this, is smoothness at full draw.

for a 40lbs bow, 28"-29" 
stack would be 2.5+lbs gained
normal would be 2.1lbs
Normal smooth would be 1.9lbs gained
hex6 smooth would be 1.6lbs gained
hex7 would be 0.9lbs
hex7.5 would be closer to 0.6lbs

as approx. values.

so with this quantified you can size up your own setup to see where you are on the term smooth.


----------



## rogbo (Jan 2, 2004)

ENOUGH ALREADY!!! Pics of some 7.5's please.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Borderbows said:


> hex7.5 would be closer to 0.6lbs


These have my interest.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> These have my interest.


Mine 2  

i have been so very fortunate to try the first Hex 7's and the first ILF CH


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

JParanee said:


> Mine 2
> 
> i have been so very fortunate to try the first Hex 7's and the first ILF CH


Joe...do you know when the Sids are accepting orders on these?...also do you know what the approx. cost of a HEX7.5CH might be and/or will they make the HEX7.5 available in ILF format right away or just CH's at first?

T.I.A. Bill.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> Joe...do you know when the Sids are accepting orders on these?...also do you know what the approx. cost of a HEX7.5CH might be and/or will they make the HEX7.5 available in ILF format right away or just CH's at first?
> 
> T.I.A. Bill.


Bill I can only speculate 

I know Sid is excited from the updates he has been giving me and I have some graphs I can post if I have SIDS permission 

I have a hunch that I might be seeing a Proto and that these limbs will be in full swing shortly 

As for price I would expect a slight increase from the 7 but I am only speculating 

An ILF version I would imagine would follow just like the 7 

Sid will be along to answer all questions I am sure 

I do not know


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

To be honest I am so pleased with the 4 pairs of 7 that I have that I can only imagine what the new 7.5 will bring


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

JINKSTER said:


> Joe...do you know when the Sids are accepting orders on these?...also do you know what the approx. cost of a HEX7.5CH might be and/or will they make the HEX7.5 available in ILF format right away or just CH's at first?
> 
> T.I.A. Bill.


I don't think they have ever released a limb straight to ILF.

Grant


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

To be honest these limbs have converted me back to a bolt down fan 

I was all the way ILF a few years ago and Sid would tell me the virtues of a bolt down system truly designed around a limb design and a set draw length 

Yes the ILF Hex 7's are awesome but I prefer my Bolt down CH to my ILF CH 

With so many different ILF Risers in play a riser designed for a certain limb does seem to have slight advantages 

Again these are small differences but like they always say......... God is in the details ...... Or maybe that's the Devils in the details


----------



## Zarrow (Sep 8, 2010)

I do not have much experience with hex limbs, except for a extremely brief stint with Hex 6s. They were too heavy for me and I didn't enjoy pulling them back. However, I am willing to give both the ILF and bolt down 7.5s a try


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Thanks Joe...I sure wish the Sids would establish some test shoot centers stateside here...even if it were just four centrally located in the quadrants with 40-45# demo bows of their line of offerings...I'd sure drive up to GA. or AL. To find out if I'd prefer a HEX7.5 Ghilli Due or a CH.

Anyway thanks for the informative response and BTW?...I agree with you on the "Bolt Down" preference with radical limbs such as these.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Jinx, your idea would also provide an opportunity to go over how to properly tune an extreme recurve. I believe that many of the comments from folks that say they have trouble tuning them is because they try to use conventional recurve tuning rules. They set the brace too high and raise to try to quiet the bow. I have a shooting friend who got a CH and could not get it to work. He talked to Sid who advised him on some approach changes to make. Now this guy tells me that you could not pry the bow away from him. And, at my draw length, I would need something lighter than a 40 to 45 if I am to avoid permanent damage to my body, and ego.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Jinx, your idea would also provide an opportunity to go over how to properly tune an extreme recurve. I believe that many of the comments from folks that say they have trouble tuning them is because they try to use conventional recurve tuning rules. They set the brace too high and raise to try to quiet the bow. I have a shooting friend who got a CH and could not get it to work. He talked to Sid who advised him on some approach changes to make. Now this guy tells me that you could not pry the bow away from him. And, at my draw length, I would need something lighter than a 40 to 45 if I am to avoid permanent damage to my body, and ego.


I think there is more mileage in your coment that most will give credit for.

afterall, if "the Bareshaft test" was THE answer to tune bows, then" the walk back method" would exist, or [insert random tuning method] here would be invented.
these different tuning tests are there because the previous system didnt work for the inventor of the next.
and the answer is simply because different people have different ways of tuning thier bows and reading the results.

i can see "arrow and bow" combo systems working reasonably well for the masses, but thats not archery. Archery is not a Formula. Its a learning process, where you learn more by playing that simply following what a chart states.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Borderbows said:


> another way to define this, is smoothness at full draw.
> 
> for a 40lbs bow, 28"-29"
> stack would be 2.5+lbs gained
> ...


From what is see. I suspect that the 7.5 will require a more specific limb pad angle. Higher? If your TS is very high as much or higher than the "C" horse bow design "static". Then you have added about approx. 1" to the limb tips curve. Totaling 6" in front of BH, past or equal to grip at BH. Benefits being wider tuning range, higher efficiency and smoothness. Maybe less draw specific. Please correct me here. Just my thoughts.
Dan


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

We have made some fun changes to the ILF. On a meduim length riser, and the bolts wound in, we have managed to get very close to the bolt down CH.

to give you some idea. an ILF 7.5 should store more energy wound out, than a hex7 does wound in. pound for pound at these respective positions.
(50lbs wound out vs 50lbs wound in)

So this warrants a 7.5 ILF

the problem is the ILF 7.5 only just catches up with the CH 7.
the CH7.5 steps forward again. so again the ILF is playing catchup.

This is when the ILF riser and limbs are used in combination.
We are also getting close on a 6 year long project that should keep the metal risered boffins happy.

we expect both 7.5s ILF and CH will be getting close to production at Christmas.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

JParanee said:


> Bill I can only speculate
> 
> I know Sid is excited from the updates he has been giving me and I have some graphs I can post if I have SIDS permission
> 
> ...


Did dad send you the ILF vs Covert DFC?


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Yes sir


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Borderbows said:


> We are also getting close on a 6 year long project that should keep the metal risered boffins happy.


Will that include adjustable limb pockets? Both vertically and horizontal?
Dan


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

JParanee said:


> Yes sir


Sid, at what point on the graphs is string lift points?
Dan


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Will that include adjustable limb pockets? Both vertically and horizontal?
> Dan


we will be looking at no lateral adjustment.

that said, the hex7s reduce the weight adjustment. they also reduce weight changes resulting in riser length changes.

an example of this would be if you had zero pounds weight gane from 26-32" then a riser length wont change the weight, nor will bolt adjustment.

the hex7s reduce riser weight adjustment from 10% total to 5% total. and riser lengths are approx 1.5lbs per length change.
its closer to 0.7lbs change now


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Sid, at what point on the graphs is string lift points?
> Dan


string lift is, as per expected where the lowest point on the smoothness graph


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Here are a couple of charts that show how a super recurve is different. The first show the first derivative of the draw force curve for three different bow geometries: longbow, conventional recurve, and super recurve. You can see how the super recurve pushes out the minimum pound/inch point to around 28 inches. The lower chart is a measure the bow leverage. A recurve gets longer as you pull it, up to the point where the string loses contact with the limbs. At that point the bow starts compressing and stacking starts to occur. This correlates with the first derivative curve.


Dan,

The bottom graph is a measure of the distance between the two points where the string loses contact with the bow. It is a simple, but not exact way to show leverage. It does not take geometry into account. The string lift point is the maximum of the curve. This is a good way to get the lift point. It is difficult to measure accurately due to the width of the string. Also, the lift point may not be the same with both limbs. You can see how the minimum in the smoothness curve correlates by comparing the two charts. They are on the same scale. This charts explains bow smoothness using leverage. As you increase leverage, you decrease pounds per inch. Once you pass the lift point, the limbs start squeezing together, ultimately leading to stacking. By the way, notice that a longbow only goes through compression since it is at the lift point at brace.

It is nice to see that others are starting to adopt the first derivative curve. Now Sid and I have to duke it out on whether it should be called a smoothness curve (for simplicity) or the first derivative curve (for clarity).


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> It is nice to see that others are starting to adopt the first derivative curve. Now Sid and I have to duke it out on whether it should be called a smoothness curve (for simplicity) or the first derivative curve (for clarity).


i remember the conversation we had in comeing up with it. it was over 5 years ago...

might dig it out.

your right in calling it the first dirivative, but smoothness seems more intuative to non-graph types. IMO. 
http://www.archeryinterchange.com/f127/hex5-alternative-use-first-impression-26106/index3.html


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Dan,
> 
> The bottom graph is a measure of the distance between the two points where the string loses contact with the bow. It is a simple, but not exact way to show leverage. It does not take geometry into account. The string lift point is the maximum of the curve. This is a good way to get the lift point. It is difficult to measure accurately due to the width of the string. Also, the lift point may not be the same with both limbs. You can see how the minimum in the smoothness curve correlates by comparing the two charts. They are on the same scale. This charts explains bow smoothness using leverage. As you increase leverage, you decrease pounds per inch. Once you pass the lift point, the limbs start squeezing together, ultimately leading to stacking. By the way, notice that a longbow only goes through compression since it is at the lift point at brace.
> 
> It is nice to see that others are starting to adopt the first derivative curve. Now Sid and I have to duke it out on whether it should be called a smoothness curve (for simplicity) or the first derivative curve (for clarity).


Steve, is it not or possible to develop a flow chart were as the an archer can input his specifics needs and derive at given combo (riser/limb) in terms of lift or string angle at his draw length. Not that I am saying we need to be draw specific but just a better fit. Sid do have charts for this but a graft called performance/draw would be better. Dan


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Steve, is it not or possible to develop a flow chart were as the an archer can input his specifics needs and derive at given combo (riser/limb) in terms of lift or string angle at his draw length. Not that I am saying we need to be draw specific but just a better fit. Sid do have charts for this but a graft called performance/draw would be better. Dan


the limb length recomendations does this in many ways.

its a chicken egg situation.

people expect limb lengths to be certain lengths. and those lengths make certain draw lengths.
so we design limbs to suit those expectations.
if you were to step out of that expectation, then you hit ALL sorts of problems. for starters what do you design, and how do you explain it to the customer base.

so rather than going agasint the flow, in EVERY aspect of design, we opt to keep bow lengths and limb lengths in expected lengths. and we then make the draw to suit those lengths.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Dan,

I remember the conversation we had in Mesa a year ago. I was talking about the lift point and how the relationship of the lift point position to full draw would make a difference in efficiency. Then I got my shooting machine and tested my theory. I found that efficiency was not impacted as I had thought. It shows that more experimentation is needed before I know enough to build the model that you suggests. Maybe the data is out there somewhere. Sid may have it. As an independent tester, I am still measuring, and still learning. The goal is good, but first I have to actually make a bow become less efficient. So far changing arrow weights and draw lengths have not had a big impact. And if I keep stored energy constant, speed is constant for different draw lengths. You have to change arrow weight for each draw length in order to do this test.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Graphs make my head hurt...my first duhrivative is...

"Yep...I'm at full draw, solid anchor" LOL!


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Dan,
> 
> I remember the conversation we had in Mesa a year ago. I was talking about the lift point and how the relationship of the lift point position to full draw would make a difference in efficiency. Then I got my shooting machine and tested my theory. I found that efficiency was not impacted as I had thought. It shows that more experimentation is needed before I know enough to build the model that you suggests. Maybe the data is out there somewhere. Sid may have it. As an independent tester, I am still measuring, and still learning. The goal is good, but first I have to actually make a bow become less efficient. So far changing arrow weights and draw lengths have not had a big impact. And if I keep stored energy constant, speed is constant for different draw lengths. You have to change arrow weight for each draw length in order to do this test.


Yes, I remember as well. This was why I still have those questions. Flight record suggest that pulling just into the first part of the stacking on some of the bows I post out perform others. I would like to see Borders (SC) there?
Dan


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Yes, I remember as well. This was why I still have those questions. Flight record suggest that pulling just into the first part of the stacking on some of the bows I post out perform others. I would like to see Borders (SC) there?
> Dan


What is it you want to know Dan?


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Borderbows said:


> What is it you want to know Dan?


I am not sure Traditional achery has a answer? 

I would like to see limb deflection and stability curves. One then could figure the leverage needed. I know industry has standards by which all limbs are measured at 28" on a 25" riser. That will only give you poundage. So effectively we buy poundage? Like a sack of potatoes. I what to buy performance. How much more will I get per set, feel or power or stability. Steve and I talked about these things.
Dan


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

DDSHOOTER said:


> I am not sure Traditional achery has a answer?
> 
> I would like to see limb deflection and stability curves. One then could figure the leverage needed. I know industry has standards by which all limbs are measured at 28" on a 25" riser. That will only give you poundage. So effectively we buy poundage? Like a sack of potatoes. I what to buy performance. How much more will I get per set, feel or power or stability. Steve and I talked about these things.
> Dan


FWIW?...maybe me sharing my new perspective on things here might help...

You are correct in that "We buy poundage" with not much in the way of proof of performance and in great part due to the fact that much like displacement in naturally asperated combustion engines?...there's no free lunch...but what there is is.....

A choice of where we would like the power to be....in the low Rev ranges for stump pulling torque or in the high Rev ranges for maximum speed...and we can adjust for that with cams and timing....same here.

Now that said?...I was quite disappointed as I read where the pro's actually preferred the $50 less W&W Inno Max Primes rather than the W&W EX Powers I purchased....and the reason cited?...was the wood core primes felt smoother on the backend allowing them to pull through the clicker in a more predictably smoother fashion.

And ^^THAT^^...."FEEL"...is where I believe the latest HEX offerings shine the brightest.

So it's not just a matter of "product performance".....it's how the product melds with the archer.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

JINKSTER said:


> FWIW?...maybe me sharing my new perspective on things here might help...
> 
> You are correct in that "We buy poundage" with not much in the way of proof of performance and in great part due to the fact that much like displacement in naturally asperated combustion engines?...there's no free lunch...but what there is is.....
> 
> ...


Bill, that's just it. Pro's do have free lunches in the way of test scoring all the new products. Just like engine builders the customer ask for a product performance and in most cases they will come with dyno test results, just like he requires that of the cam manufacture and so on. I am just trying to get a little more test results than poundage. When we buy $500.00 transducers we require the manufacture to provide calibration figures for each unit. This allow us to ultra fine tune our subsystem. 
Dan


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Jinx,

Feel was what I brought up, but not just from the perspective that a smooth feel is nice and comfortable to shoot, but how the feel helps improve performance. The soft back end feels smooth, but it also requires less force to expand the last 1/8 inch at release, or if you are an Oly style shooter, to get through the clicker. We need to focus less on what we are holding at full draw, and think about the incremental force required to expand and get a good release. Smooth is nice, but execution puts points on the board. In this case smoothness contributes to better execution, much like the let off on a compound contributes to better execution. You get high end speed as an additional benefit.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Jinx,
> 
> Feel was what I brought up, but not just from the perspective that a smooth feel is nice and comfortable to shoot, but how the feel helps improve performance. The soft back end feels smooth, but it also requires less force to expand the last 1/8 inch at release, or if you are an Oly style shooter, to get through the clicker. We need to focus less on what we are holding at full draw, and think about the incremental force required to expand and get a good release. Smooth is nice, but execution puts points on the board. In this case smoothness contributes to better execution, much like the let off on a compound contributes to better execution. You get high end speed as an additional benefit.


Steve, this is all true. But how do we get there to that true sweet spot. So far, for me, it's been a long Barebow trial by error journey. 
Dan


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Jinx,
> 
> Feel was what I brought up, but not just from the perspective that a smooth feel is nice and comfortable to shoot, but how the feel helps improve performance. The soft back end feels smooth, but it also requires less force to expand the last 1/8 inch at release, or if you are an Oly style shooter, to get through the clicker. We need to focus less on what we are holding at full draw, and think about the incremental force required to expand and get a good release. Smooth is nice, but execution puts points on the board. In this case smoothness contributes to better execution, much like the let off on a compound contributes to better execution. You get high end speed as an additional benefit.


So yes Hank...we are on the same page and in full agreement.


----------



## BarneySlayer (Feb 28, 2009)

JINKSTER said:


> So it's not just a matter of "product performance".....it's how the product melds with the archer.


Nice summed up 

And, like archers, it will vary.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

JINKSTER said:


> So yes Hank...we are on the same page and in full agreement.


Looks like it. Somebody take a screen grab just in case this gets deleted. This may be a first case ever of full agreement on the world wide web.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

DDSHOOTER said:


> Bill, that's just it. Pro's do have free lunches in the way of test scoring all the new products. Just like engine builders the customer ask for a product performance and in most cases they will come with dyno test results, just like he requires that of the cam manufacture and so on. I am just trying to get a little more test results than poundage. When we buy $500.00 transducers we require the manufacture to provide calibration figures for each unit. This allow us to ultra fine tune our subsystem.
> Dan


Since 2007 i have been trying to state that smoothness is not subjective. It is quantifiable.
The smoothness graph shows you where and how much in each part of the draw. But for those that are not technically minded that the string lift point shows you where the smoothest part is.
I have demonstrated methods to test vertical and torsional stability as well as methods to test TS in a more complex way.
I have been given kudos from fellow bow makers for this testing equipment. It was intended to be simple to use and make.
I even recieved coments from cynical people that if super recurves are superior. How come no one else makes them. Those that have followed my threads over the years will have seen these questions.

Now other bowyers are starting to explore super recurves. 
Its gathering pace.
I even coined the term "super recurves"
As it helps define the difference.

But i feel its up to you the customer base to test these things and not trust the bowyers. As this leads to false information which is why i respect Hanks drive to test what we say.
Ive tried to be open with things. 
My problem is how do you test something that has never been tested before. Such as how does the shortening of the free string during the push cycle effect paradox... (supporting it in a string groove early in the shot and supporting more of it)

What i do find odd is even in the face of overwhelming facts. Is that we have solved the instability of big recurves. People still question it.
We have done it. And the facts are plain to see in the numbers of people shooting "impossibly large" recurves to podium places.
Not only that. Taking world flight titles. Horse bow golds and clout records. 
Everywhere where no sponsership infects the sport. You will find big recurves doing whats regarded as traditionally impossible.


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

Sid, you should not find it odd in my case? I believe you when you state factual things. This was not or would never be my intent. I like Steve, AKA Hank, like to know a little more how things tick.
Dan


----------



## rogbo (Jan 2, 2004)

Usually I'm a pretty visual guy but I can't make it make sense with the graphs provided and the documented smoothness. I want to. So, can Sid or Dan or Hank or someone doctor up one of those graphs and highlight somehow, the lift points and at what point on the graph we are documenting or quantifying "smoothness". Thanx


----------



## DDSHOOTER (Aug 22, 2005)

This might help.
http://tradtalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=39849
Dan


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Imagine two bows. One drops at 3lbs an inch and one drops at 1lb an inch.
What the smoothness graph shows is how each inch realates to the last.
As you can see. Pre load in the first inch is high. 7lbs in the first inch. Good energy is high here.
As you pull back the growth in poundage slows down. So the line drops down to its lowest point.
The lowest point is the one with least poundage gain.
Then you start in stack. The beginnings of.
As the line starts to climb. And the steeper it gets the more its stacking.
But remember to look at the lbs per inch.
For example. Its possible to have very steep but only gain 1lbs per inch. Its just the previous inch was 0.1.
Where as you can also have a shallow stack but its 3lbs per inch. Its just the previous inch was 2.9lbs
For a 30lbs bow. 2lbs per inch or more could be stack so 3lbs is horrid


----------



## Bill 2311 (Jun 24, 2005)

Well we should start seeing a few Hex 6.5 CH bows showing up for sale shortly.
I was planning on putting my ILF Hex 6.5 up for sale here in a week or two to fund a new CH anyway.

I thought I remember seeing a recent link to info on the new CH bows but can't find it. Anyone remember it?


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

It's interesting that the 7.5 seem to stack harder past the lowest gain compared to the 6.5 but that the low point seems a little earlier in the draw cycle.

Grant


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Bill 2311 said:


> Well we should start seeing a few Hex 6.5 CH bows showing up for sale shortly.
> I was planning on putting my ILF Hex 6.5 up for sale here in a week or two to fund a new CH anyway.
> 
> I thought I remember seeing a recent link to info on the new CH bows but can't find it. Anyone remember it?


All CH's are Hex 7 bows till the 7.5 makes its debut


----------



## virginmesa (Nov 9, 2013)

Super recurves are really Reflex/Deflex bows. One-piece solid wood Longbow is the way to go if you really want to feel and connect with each shot. Sad truth is you need about two years of practice to be able to hold still enough to not need a heavy riser. Hand shock and other vibration related issues are in the riser/limb design and grip/shooting style of the archer come in to play as well. In my humble opinion, 21st Century Longbows are one of the ultimate SUPER BOWS.


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

grantmac said:


> It's interesting that the 7.5 seem to stack harder past the lowest gain compared to the 6.5 but that the low point seems a little earlier in the draw cycle.
> 
> Grant





JParanee said:


> Yes sir


But thats the fun bit.
It pulls less pound gained. So smoother from 18" onwards.
Even when ut climbing. Its still pulling less per inch even when its gone steeper.
The lower the better :-D


----------



## Borderbows (Apr 4, 2009)

Bill 2311 said:


> Well we should start seeing a few Hex 6.5 CH bows showing up for sale shortly.
> I was planning on putting my ILF Hex 6.5 up for sale here in a week or two to fund a new CH anyway.
> 
> I thought I remember seeing a recent link to info on the new CH bows but can't find it. Anyone remember it?


The covert has been out 2 years now. All the hex6 black douglas bows hit the trading blankets last year.

The hex7.5 will be an limb upgrade to existing covert hunter owners


----------

