# David Barnsdale's new shoot through bow



## JHENS87

Interesting for sure, would like to see a pic of the full bow


----------



## doulos

Interesting… Looks like a ton of clearance without spreaders.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Picture of the full bow was from a distance and really, nothing stands out.


----------



## OCHO505

Curios to see how it is! Looks unique for sure!!


----------



## Pete53

does it also have a shoot thru riser so its a double shoot thru like ok bows ?


----------



## SonnyThomas

Looked like a regular bow. Again the picture of the full bow was from a distance.


----------



## jmann28




----------



## aread

Seems like it would be slow with that much weight at the limb tips.


----------



## Lazarus

aread said:


> Seems like it would be slow with that much weight at the limb tips.


Combines are slow compared to race cars. But they get their intended job done. :teeth: 

Very intriguing system/look. :cheers:


----------



## Padgett

Now that is cool.


----------



## doulos

Im pretty sure that is an Elite Tour riser that Barnsdale uses for his Addiction


----------



## caspian

aread said:


> Seems like it would be slow with that much weight at the limb tips.


compound limb tips don't move that much really. there would no doubt be some small impact, but only if you think the last couple of feet per second makes any difference. personally I don't think it makes much difference if the arrow leaves at 328fps or 320fps.


----------



## Carbofastdirect

doulos said:


> Interesting… Looks like a ton of clearance without spreaders.


Looks like too much room, I see problems with the cables hitting your arm at full draw.


----------



## aread

Lazarus said:


> Combines are slow compared to race cars. But they get their intended job done. :teeth:
> 
> Very intriguing system/look. :cheers:


Good point. :thumbs_up Also, as I look more closely, it appears that Dave just moved the modules outside the limbs rather than inside the limb slot. It probably doesn't add as much weight as it would seem on first glance. It looks weird, but weird looking is likely where we'll get advances at this point of compound bow development. 

It looks like it could work with a much narrower limb slot or even a narrower limb.

I bet it's super easy to tune. My old Nitrous X certainly is.

Allen


----------



## Lazarus

Carbofastdirect said:


> Looks like too much room, I see problems with the cables hitting your arm at full draw.


Agreed. Isn't this same concept already being utilized by OK Archery in a much cleaner package?


----------



## Garceau

Carbofastdirect said:


> Looks like too much room, I see problems with the cables hitting your arm at full draw.


That was the issue I had with the Strother Moxie 14. 

We had production changes that would have cleaned it up - but since then everything has been on a slow down.


----------



## csteinberg

any word on a release date? 
or if it will be released?


----------



## SonnyThomas

No mention of release or of how it shot. There was a notation of it having a fairly hard wall. Unsure of the bolt heads on the outside cams(?), top and bottom. Limb stops?
As for speed or slow, it doesn't take a whole lot to "kill" paper and to me that's what the bow appears to be for. Note the brace height. 
Don't know which gives the cam action as the cams the bow string is on look fairly round.


----------



## doulos

Carbofastdirect said:


> Looks like too much room, I see problems with the cables hitting your arm at full draw.


 Good point. Shows I'm not well versed in shoot through design.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Carbofastdirect said:


> Looks like too much room, I see problems with the cables hitting your arm at full draw.


Not a bow for those with hyper extended elbows


----------



## ron w

I shot a shoot-through Merlin for years. they used spreaders to get about 2 inches of distance between cables . if you shoot with decent form and stance, there should be no problems with cable contact. those that shoot with a fully closed stance and fairly stretched out draw arm /shoulder arrangement will have problems, but that's the result of poor form and stance. i'm quite sure Dave would not try to market a bow that would be troublesome for the large majority of shooters. those that make comments about "arm contact", are the ones that this bow is not intended to appeal to, for obvious reasons.........Dave doesn't design bows for people who don't know what's up about shoot through systems.


----------



## GWFH

Carbofastdirect said:


> Looks like too much room, I see problems with the cables hitting your arm at full draw.


They still attach just outside limbs, like the ok.
They dont route inboard though so might be talking 1/8" more at forearm.....same as spreaders add.


----------



## highwaynorth

Lazarus said:


> Agreed. Isn't this same concept already being utilized by OK Archery in a much cleaner package?


Yes, along with a better riser.


----------



## Lazarus

ron w said:


> I shot a shoot-through Merlin for years. they used spreaders to get about 2 inches of distance between cables . if you shoot with decent form and stance, there should be no problems with cable contact. those that shoot with a fully closed stance and fairly stretched out draw arm /shoulder arrangement will have problems, but that's the result of poor form and stance. i'm quite sure Dave would not try to market a bow that would be troublesome for the large majority of shooters. those that make comments about "arm contact", are the ones that this bow is not intended to appeal to, for obvious reasons.........Dave doesn't design bows for people who don't know what's up about shoot through systems.


WELCOME BACK RONW!!! Where have you been??? :cheers:


----------



## cbrunson

Lazarus said:


> WELCOME BACK RONW!!! Where have you been??? :cheers:


LOL. It's been awful quiet around here hasn't it?


----------



## Pete53

I sent a e-mail to dave today to see if he can put that shoot thru system on my newer classic-x bow. so we will see ? it sure looks neat ! or maybe it would worked on my shoot thru riser hoyt then I would have a double shoot thru ?


----------



## ron w

how does it shoot.......
ooohhhh, ...... i'll wager it shoots pretty good.


----------



## Huntinsker

The cables do look pretty wide. The longer the brace height, the wider the cables can be without them hitting your arm. If this has an 8" brace, it shouldn't be a problem.


----------



## ADCTD2SHOOTING

I think the easiest way to get people past the fear of an arm strike would be to put a cable guide next to the string stop and just have the cables pull in on both sides a little to hit on a two side slide beneath the grip. Should still leave plenty of clearance for the arrow and would appeal to those worried. Market cured. Now when will that be for Sale.


----------



## ron w

most people are simply too stretched out from too long a draw length and have way to closed a stance because of the too long draw length, that's all it is.


----------



## Garceau

Here we a go again....... Arbitrary statements about "proper form"

Proper form is any form that's repeatable and accurate - PERIOD.

As has been said over and over....Jesse and Reo don't have text book form. Reo often wears an arm guard. But you can't argue with results.

My coach has me in a very closed stance- it's what produced the best results with my body, my build, and previous injuries. 

The barnsdale bow cam system intrigues me. I may get a chance to shoot one at the yooper shoot


----------



## caspian

ron w said:


> most people are simply too stretched out from too long a draw length and have way to closed a stance because of the too long draw length, that's all it is.


draw length is a function of getting inline so the shoulder blade joint aligns and bones take the load, not muscle.

that requires the bow arm to be close in to the string. shoot through (or, more realistically, shoot around) systems are not a good idea because they promote poor biomechanics. at best you're substituting one problem for another, and that's on the assumption that a shoot through system solves something that's an issue in the first place.


----------



## Carbofastdirect

Garceau said:


> Here we a go again....... Arbitrary statements about "proper form"
> 
> Proper form is any form that's repeatable and accurate - PERIOD.
> 
> As has been said over and over....Jesse and Reo don't have text book form. Reo often wears an arm guard. But you can't argue with results.
> 
> My coach has me in a very closed stance- it's what produced the best results with my body, my build, and previous injuries.
> 
> The barnsdale bow cam system intrigues me. I may get a chance to shoot one at the yooper shoot




Totally Agree, once you can repeat what you do and hit where you want to hit consistently whos to say your form is wrong. I like to look of it but I stick to my original thoughts and say it LOOKS like the cables are a tad wide.

I shoot an OK shoot through system with and without spreaders without an issue but Daves cables do look to be wider.
Im sure it is a fantastic shooting platform and I admire the outside of the box thinking


----------



## SonnyThomas

Garceau said:


> Here we a go again....... Arbitrary statements about "proper form"
> 
> Proper form is any form that's repeatable and accurate - PERIOD.
> 
> As has been said over and over....Jesse and Reo don't have text book form. Reo often wears an arm guard. But you can't argue with results.
> 
> My coach has me in a very closed stance- it's what produced the best results with my body, my build, and previous injuries.
> 
> The barnsdale bow cam system intrigues me. I may get a chance to shoot one at the yooper shoot





caspian said:


> draw length is a function of getting inline so the shoulder blade joint aligns and bones take the load, not muscle.
> 
> that requires the bow arm to be close in to the string. shoot through (or, more realistically, shoot around) systems are not a good idea because they promote poor biomechanics. at best you're substituting one problem for another, and that's on the assumption that a shoot through system solves something that's an issue in the first place.





Carbofastdirect said:


> Totally Agree, once you can repeat what you do and hit where you want to hit consistently whos to say your form is wrong. I like to look of it but I stick to my original thoughts and say it LOOKS like the cables are a tad wide.
> 
> I shoot an OK shoot through system with and without spreaders without an issue but Daves cables do look to be wider.
> Im sure it is a fantastic shooting platform and I admire the outside of the box thinking


Some people just plain will not be able to shoot this bow without some adjustment to their form whether perfect or perfect for them. How this person going to shoot this bow? And he won the Utah Open years back. I do believe I could shoot this bow without the cables hitting my arm.


----------



## Garceau

That person is none other than Forrest Carter


----------



## ron w

there is a certain amount of "repeatability" that is the foundation of good form that is true. but there is also a certain element of "form that promotes decent tension across the back shoulders and a stable platform for the shot to develop on. that platform is based on draw length. if that is not correct, repeatablility will suffer from a lack of consistent dynamics that is proportional to your body's structure and anatomical proportion. this is not an "arbitrary element" it is determined by the very physical dimensions and proportions of your body, your strength and the known dynamics that produce a "good shot execution". it's just like anything else in sports activities. there are specific lengths of hockey sticks for people's heights, specific lengths of golf club shafts for people heights, and so on. the lengths that work best for you are determined by your anatomy, not by repeatability. the repeatability comes out of using the correct equipment sizes and having good form using them. you don't give a 5 foot tall kid a bike made for someone 6 feet tall and expect the kid to ride it well, do you ?. you don't expect someone to shoot a bow well that has a 31 inch draw length when his body fits a 27 inch draw length....why is that ?. yes it is "repeatability" that produces good scores and good shooting, but that repeatability must be produced by having the correct form and that cannot be realized when the equipment doesn't fit. to say that is "arbitrary" is to say you don't know much about the sport's science. there would be no reason to produce bows of different draw lengths, if the repeatability was not produced out of good form and properly fitting equipment. 
what's arbitrary about that ?.


----------



## ron w

I have one of Forrest's bows. a red Merlin Max 2000 that I bought from him here on the AT classifieds years ago and of course I use Carter releases. there are always people who deviate from the classic box of form. to illustrate one or two people who are outside that box, as blanket justification of it's not being necessary, only exemplifies a lack of understanding of it's elementary process. the more advanced a shooter you are, the more probable, you will be able to cope with mis-fitting equipment and still produce the repeatability that is necessary to produce good shots. 
I can shoot a bow that is anywhere from about 27 to 29 inch draw length, but I shoot the best when I'm using a bow that is 27 and 5/8 inches. outside that 27 to 29 inch range, I have trouble producing the repeatability needed to consistently and confidently hit what I aim at.


----------



## Mahly

Not everything works for everybody.
I'm betting I could shoot this bow without issue based on form alone. Not because my form is "better" than most. My form gives me lots of clearance, that's all.
That won't be the case for everyone. Luckily, there will be many other bows that archers can choose from that fit THEM.
It's just one more thing to consider when choosing a bow.
I'd sure like to try it.... Then again, I was all pumped to try the Moxie XIV as well


----------



## ron w

that's exactly what I mean by saying the bow isn't designed for people who don't have a decently developed proper form. if your form is good the width won't be detriment and follow through won't produce contact to the extent that you get slapped. when I shot merlin's shoot through, the cables just made contact as the bow came to the end of it's natural recoil in my follow through. the cables just touching my arm after they had stopped. 
when you are all stretched out with too long a draw length and too closed a stance, hard contact is inevitable. if you watch Dave shoot, in any of the various videos that show him in Vegas, you will see that he has a very well developed shot process, with good open stance and form that produces good tension across the back of the shoulders and plenty of clearance at the bow arm for the wider cable spacing.....typical of a well advanced shooter.
I have always considered his form as one of the better displays of what good form should be.


----------



## Bazzer

The OK Archery bow is all this and more. Being German made the quality could not be better. It has a shoot through riser. As well as cable strings that can be tuned without the need of a press. I have the Absolute 38 and love it.


----------



## Mahly

This does look to be a 3 track slaved cam. I can see some performance advantages there as well as a significant cost savings vs. the OK's amazing if expensive bows.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Off subject, maybe...Has the OK ever made it to the "Winner's Circle?" When? How many times?


----------



## ron w

caspian said:


> draw length is a function of getting inline so the shoulder blade joint aligns and bones take the load, not muscle.
> 
> that requires the bow arm to be close in to the string. shoot through (or, more realistically, shoot around) systems are not a good idea because they promote poor biomechanics. at best you're substituting one problem for another, and that's on the assumption that a shoot through system solves something that's an issue in the first place.


 before I shot my first shoot through, I shot for many years with a conventional bow. I made no adjustments to my form when I stated using the shoot through bow and had no problems with contact. my post was to infer that the contact problems are because people do not have proper form to begin with because they learned to shoot with too long a draw length. the correct draw length...proper fit..... is a proprietary element of good form.


----------



## field14

ron w said:


> before i shot my first shoot through, i shot for many years with a conventional bow. I made no adjustments to my form when i stated using the shoot through bow and had no problems with contact. My post was to infer that the contact problems are because people do not have proper form to begin with because they learned to shoot with too long a draw length. The correct draw length...proper fit..... Is a proprietary element of good form.


bingo!


----------



## Iowa shooter

SonnyThomas said:


> Off subject, maybe...Has the OK ever made it to the "Winner's Circle?" When? How many times?


Do they have archers that shoot for a living with no other job?


----------



## Lazarus

SonnyThomas said:


> Off subject, maybe...Has the OK ever made it to the "Winner's Circle?" When? How many times?


In Europe I'm almost certain the answer would be yes. 

In the U.S, considering they are probably less than 1% of the competitive bows out there I'd say no. :teeth:

Sorry if this is contributing to topic drift.


----------



## SonnyThomas

SonnyThomas said:


> Off subject, maybe...Has the OK ever made it to the "Winner's Circle?" When? How many times?





Iowa shooter said:


> Do they have archers that shoot for a living with no other job?


I should have put; "Has any shoot through system been in the "Winner's Circle?" I can't even remember Martin being there, but no doubt has and when was that?

As for archers shooting for a living, I know of only a handful of American shooters that have contracts that allow them to shoot for a living. Most all Pros have full time jobs. I know of one Pro that missed the ASA ProAm at Metropolis, Illinois because he job required him to work....I spoke with him on that Sunday of the ProAm and asked why he was here instead of there.


----------



## Iowa shooter

SonnyThomas said:


> I should have put; "Has any shoot through system been in the "Winner's Circle?" I can't even remember Martin being there, but no doubt has and when was that?
> 
> As for archers shooting for a living, I know of only a handful of American shooters that have contracts that allow them to shoot for a living. Most all Pros have full time jobs. I know of one Pro that missed the ASA ProAm at Metropolis, Illinois because he job required him to work....I spoke with him on that Sunday of the ProAm and asked why he was here instead of there.


Ok, but if they hired a Levii, a Reo, or a Erika they would probably win quite often.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Lazarus said:


> In Europe I'm almost certain the answer would be yes.
> 
> In the U.S, considering they are probably less than 1% of the competitive bows out there I'd say no. :teeth:
> 
> Sorry if this is contributing to topic drift.


No topic drift for me. Thanks, Laz. Other than here on AT I've never first hand seen a OK or even a Martin of old. 2009 was the last offering by Martin and I almost ordered one.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Iowa shooter said:


> Ok, but if they hired a Levii, a Reo, or a Erika they would probably win quite often.


OK probably couldn't afford them  Just think, Levi and Chance are both shooting for Elite. Have you any idea what that amounts to? OK would have to sell one heck of a lot of bows and arrows (I got my half dozen free ).


----------



## ron w

at all levels the, cost of bows goes on the books as a "cost of doing business", a tax deduction. a shop or a manufacturer will sell a lot less bows when there are no representatives out in the field, and that expense, as well is a "cost of doing business. in that archery is a specialized niche, the amortization rate is 100%. when some salesman tells you he can't reduce a price because of this type of over head,...... he is pulling your you know what.


----------



## SonnyThomas

I'd have to read up, but when my wife and I were in the horse business tax deductions were percentages of, not full amounts. Weird was it better for us to sell our own hay and buy hay for our horses. We still had out of pocket expenses, just not as much because of tax deductions.


----------



## ron w

hay isn't a niche component of the horse business, it is used to feed for many other animals and there are many other things that can be horse feed. therefore you cannot amortize at 100%. bows are pretty much the main niche in the archery business. it's pretty hard to sell bows or shoot archery without having a bow. see the difference ?. so happens you could buy hay cheaper than you could grow it, in your area that puts the decision on what you do on your shoulders and removes opportunity to deduct it from your taxes as a niche expense of doing your business. if you could grow a hay that had some special vitamin that your particular horses needed, you would be able to claim it a 100%. again, ...see the difference ?.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Nope, I don't see the difference. And we're a little more than off the subject. My fault.


----------



## Iowa shooter

SonnyThomas said:


> OK probably couldn't afford them  Just think, Levi and Chance are both shooting for Elite. Have you any idea what that amounts to? OK would have to sell one heck of a lot of bows and arrows (I got my half dozen free ).


Yes, but is the point that they are a design that would win with pros shooting or that OK can't afford them?


----------



## SonnyThomas

Well, Pros being that they are what bow couldn't they win with? Levi shot Mathews last year and took ASA SOY and this year he's shooting a Elite and looking at another ASA SOY. Same with Chance. He was shooting for PSE and doing good and now shooting Elite and doing every bit as good.

OK wouldn't have need to contract good shooters, just put up contingency money the big boys would go after....


----------



## GWFH

Why cant people be happy theres another target bow to choose from.....cup of tea or not.
Entire intent of thread got derailed by complaints of the details, then followed by someone getting defensive of what they thought another was implying (there was no mention of proper form at that point, actually different methods of form called out with expected results of each).
....and now we're on hay and horses?

Maybe this one is a candidate for getting chopped to general section?


----------



## ron w

they are all good bows. no-one makes a bad bow any more. years ago there were some that were better for one reason or another, but not anymore. any one of the pros can pick up any bow and in a few shots , be shooting as good as ever. it's because of the bow, it's because they have their shot sorted out.
thread drift sometime happens because the issue at hand is so thrashed over time and time again, it becomes something that a few words is all that is needed.
shoot through bows is just one of those subjects. sure, it's great that Dave came out with a new bow,....it's good if anyone comes out with a new bow....'nuff said.


----------



## Lazarus

GWFH said:


> Why cant people be happy theres another target bow to choose from.....cup of tea or not.
> Entire intent of thread got derailed by complaints of the details, then followed by someone getting defensive of what they thought another was implying (there was no mention of proper form at that point, actually different methods of form called out with expected results of each).
> ....and now we're on hay and horses?
> 
> Maybe this one is a candidate for getting chopped to general section?


I like this post! ^^

From the first time I saw the pics of this system on FB I have thought the following; 

(1)Not for me I doubt
(2)It's probably a prototype and will be tweaked, maybe even to a point that you'd never recognize it when compared to this version.
(3)Like it or not it could possibly lead to something really innovative. 

And last, and most important;

(4)I'm really glad there are outside the box thinkers like Dave Barnsdale out there that have tried new/different things their entire careers. Because of them bows/arrows/releases have really progressed over the last fifty years. 

Having said that, I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person. But I would have no more idea how to design a set of bow cams that worked, build prototypes, test them, then take them through a process of manufacture to the point they could be even be photographed and not look like something the cats drug in. I have the utmost respect for people with that ability even if I think their idea looks crazy. 

:cheers:


----------



## ron w

Dave's probably been playing with that design for a couple years before letting it out. he's pretty thorough in his thinking and developmental methodology. i'll wager there won't be much in subsequent tweeks and improvements, beyond a posssible cam profile tweek for a few more FPS,.... or something like that. he may find a better profile and change the cams and then offer upgrades, but by the time he lets something out of the cage, it's pretty much been systematically proven already. 
about the only thing I can potentially predict, is that he might respond to the concerns seen here about the width of the shoot through rig, and off a narrower choice.....maybe. at the same time it is a target bow and the status quoi is big feathers. further, the farer apart those cables are, beter a job they do controlling limb twist and the lighter the cables can be, so the clearance is justifiable from his stand point, as a manufacturer and as far as performance is concerned.


----------



## Rick!

GWFH said:


> Why cant people be happy theres another target bow to choose from.....cup of tea or not.
> Entire intent of thread got derailed by complaints of the details, then followed by someone getting defensive of what they thought another was implying (there was no mention of proper form at that point, actually different methods of form called out with expected results of each).
> ....and now we're on hay and horses?
> 
> Maybe this one is a candidate for getting chopped to general section?





Lazarus said:


> I like this post! ^^
> 
> From the first time I saw the pics of this system on FB I have thought the following;
> 
> (1)Not for me I doubt
> (2)It's probably a prototype and will be tweaked, maybe even to a point that you'd never recognize it when compared to this version.
> (3)Like it or not it could possibly lead to something really innovative.
> 
> And last, and most important;
> 
> (4)I'm really glad there are outside the box thinkers like Dave Barnsdale out there that have tried new/different things their entire careers. Because of them bows/arrows/releases have really progressed over the last fifty years.
> 
> Having said that, I consider myself a reasonably intelligent person. But I would have no more idea how to design a set of bow cams that worked, build prototypes, test them, then take them through a process of manufacture to the point they could be even be photographed and not look like something the cats drug in. I have the utmost respect for people with that ability even if I think their idea looks crazy.
> 
> :cheers:


Thanks for reeling this back in GWFH!!!

I'm not sure if it is out of the box, maybe "outside the limb". There's two ways to facilitate a shoot thru cable system the way I see it; inside a set of split limbs (or really wide tapered single limb) or outside one-piece limbs. This looks like method #2. 

Different bows may need different grips to make them work but one that requires me to change my form and stance - nope, not going there. I would shoot an OK before the on-topic bow. There are several shooters in this state with OK's and they are gaining in popularity as Hoyt is raising their prices enough to make OK a feasible alternative. 

The interesting thing is is that Mr. Barnsdale sells cable spacers for Martin, OK's and his own Tristar version so he's got his finger on the pulse of shoot through systems.

Last but least, this topic is gear related so one could ask if it really belongs here. Brand name bow posts in here previously were moved, this one is no different IMO.


----------



## Mahly

We have allowed discussion on gear that has a truly unique and/or innovative attribute, or design feature.


----------



## SonnyThomas

GWFH said:


> Why cant people be happy theres another target bow to choose from.....cup of tea or not.
> Entire intent of thread got derailed by complaints of the details, then followed by someone getting defensive of what they thought another was implying (there was no mention of proper form at that point, actually different methods of form called out with expected results of each).
> ....and now we're on hay and horses?
> 
> Maybe this one is a candidate for getting chopped to general section?


My Post and I called "my fault" in reply #55. Just pointing out, not badgering or anything....


----------



## Mahly

That said, I'll move it if we want it moved....


----------



## SonnyThomas

My Post. If someone wants it moved I want it deleted....


----------



## Lazarus

It's an internet forum. Opinion and entertainment with a little bit of valuable info woven in. I don't believe the world is going to end if it stays here, or if it's moved for that matter. 

Now, if we really want the topic moved to another area I guess we could start a discussion about how the "president" has responded to the death of five Marines in Tennessee. :shhh:


----------



## Mahly

Nah... That would just get posts deleted and people given infractions for thread highjacking


----------



## ron w

I seem to remember a thread many years ago, in the old forum, were the idea of running cable cams outside the limbs to produce a shoot through condition, was mentioned and discussed to some extent. I don't think you can come up with something (an idea) that hasn't at least been thought about at an earlier time.
thread drift to some extent, is going to happen as a course of conversation. there must be a certain tolerance for it, for the sake of entertainment....... we aren't robots.


----------



## bigbadwoolfe

SonnyThomas said:


> Off subject, maybe...Has the OK ever made it to the "Winner's Circle?" When? How many times?


I'm guessing you believe Hoyt makes the best bows then, considering Hoyt bows clean up all the time. 

Then again, saying any bows win medals is like saying paint brushes paint paintings... 

The OK bows have many advantages, particularly the Absolute series. The full symmetry of the bows makes them super easy to tune and eliminates problems that many people just don't want to, or don't know how to deal with. So if they don't make the "Winner's Circle", mostly because there aren't sponsored Pro's shooting them, they're still great bows that would give any other bow a run for their money.


----------



## ron w

design of bow not withstanding, the winners' circle is usually filled by the guy that can shoot better than everyone else, on that day. he most likely would end up there no matter what bow he used. the bows, no matter the design, all shoot good when properly tuned. at the level of "professional archer", the equipment makes very little difference, provided it is set up right....and at that level of competition, it is a given that the equipment is right.
it seems to me, that only the people who don't realize this, are the ones who think equipment brands and designs, make a difference. remember,...... a long time ago, a fellow named Terry Raggsdale set records at Vegas, that to this day, have not been bettered, using bows that we , today, would not bother shooting for their lack of advanced technology. equipment, no,....shooter, yes.


----------



## SonnyThomas

SonnyThomas said:


> *I should have put; "Has any shoot through system been in the "Winner's Circle?" I can't even remember Martin being there, but no doubt has and when was that?*
> As for archers shooting for a living, I know of only a handful of American shooters that have contracts that allow them to shoot for a living. Most all Pros have full time jobs. I know of one Pro that missed the ASA ProAm at Metropolis, Illinois because he job required him to work....I spoke with him on that Sunday of the ProAm and asked why he was here instead of there.





bigbadwoolfe said:


> I'm guessing you believe Hoyt makes the best bows then, considering Hoyt bows clean up all the time.
> 
> Then again, saying any bows win medals is like saying paint brushes paint paintings...
> 
> The OK bows have many advantages, particularly the Absolute series. The full symmetry of the bows makes them super easy to tune and eliminates problems that many people just don't want to, or don't know how to deal with. So if they don't make the "Winner's Circle", mostly because there aren't sponsored Pro's shooting them, they're still great bows that would give any other bow a run for their money.


Well, I've owned 11 Hoyts that I remember  I've owned a lot of different brands, some I didn't care for, and have placed and won with them all. So I know it's the Indian. 

What I was getting at, if a shoot through system is so great why hasn't it made the "Winner's Circle?" Martin had the shoot through system for years and I can't find where it won. Many of the older Martin shooters want the shoot through system back. Just last week I was asked what a set of Nitrous B cams were worth.


----------



## ron w

that's good question that I've always wondered about myself. having shot several Merlins with shoot through rigs for years, I know the advantages and have always wondered just why they never really caught on.
currently looking at getting cams and spreaders, to convert my single cam Supra to shoot through, as an experiment.
oddly, there is still such a general reluctance to accept shoot through rigs that many PSE, Hoyt and OK and others, shoot through risered bows, are delivered with conventional rigs on them, when it is more the rig that demonstrates the advantages of a "shoot through" design, than the riser, despite their all offering a shoot through rig to go with the riser.


----------



## bigHUN

I am not at home but once I get my hands on one of my old accurisers (I am keeping them as collectionar items hanging on the wall in my cave),
I will take those Wedel cams off and put a spacer inbetween to the DL modules, long enough to clear the Barnsdale limbs from outside,
and voila, I can even picture to myself that new exciting design some of the above posts talking about ....
oh man, some of you started rolling as kicking an empty can downhill 

edit:
and I will have cable stops as well, I made DIY on the modules long ago :eyebrows:


----------



## hollywood88

Ive drawn up a few ideas extremely similar to this setup over the years but was never sure how to make it work. Im very glad to see that dave has foumd the way to build it. Would be interesting to see one up close and see how he went about doing it and how much his design differs from the thoughts and designs ive had.


----------



## ron w

simply an axle long enough to accommodate the "outside the limb cable cams" and a bridge structure that connects string cam to outside cams. this bridge radiates around the end of the limb as the assembled unit rotates in use. pictures aren't clear enough to see the detail of the stops, but I would think the bridge design includes the stops, maybe by each set of outside cams having an integrated stop that coordinates with the draw length each cam set is designed for,...working just like typical limb stops. I see what looks like some sort of rubber O-rings in the pictures where the outside cams apparently attach to the bridge,...possibly a cushion for the stops to avoid limb damage and provide some give......Dave is a hinge shooter.
just a guess on my part, but that's what I see from the pics and what I know of mechanical design.


----------



## Pete53

I have a son who shoots archery very well and has always done very well in Minnesota with his hoyt bows,so for a test I purchased a new ok archery bow dst40 last winter my son`s scores stayed the same all winter,his scores are 300 55-58 x`s, but his comment was ok bow was a much easier bow to shoot with much less shock and vibration and he said he likes that ok bow a lot now. I would bet if jesse broadwater or another top pro shot an ok archery or barnsdale target bow they would do very well with those bows too ,remember its not the bow its the higher paid indian who wins more now days,just think how well that ok bow or barnsdale bow would shoot with a young terry ragsdale shooting or with the new barnsdale cam system ? don`t forget dave himself will be shooting his new shoot thru cam system too and dave barnsdale himself has won Vegas in the pro division with his classic-X barnsdale bow too already ! myself I am impressed with this new barnsdale shoot thru cam system.


----------



## ron w

I find it amazing that after so many years of the shoot through system being around, it is finally starting to show it's advantage and presence on more than just one or two bow brands. I wonder if shoot through bows are finally going to be something more than just an oddity on the shooting lines. 
I've shot one for many years and very well know the advantages they possess. people consider a shoot through riser, with a conventional rig, a " shoot through bow ", when they actually lack the element that makes shoot through technology work best. a true "shoot through bow" has both the riser and the rig. 
similarly, there are bows with shoot through rigs and conventional risers, Merlin archery was famous for that combination. I shot one for years and would consider that a closer to a true shoot through bow, than a than the former. it is the rig where the advantage is best made useful.


----------



## [email protected]

Here are some rough sketches that I sent to Athens and Pearson in 2013. 
Pretty cool to see a similar idea come to life. 
Craig


----------



## ron w

what did they say in response ?.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Something about the cable shoot through system must warrant ignoring on the part of the major bow companies.


----------



## hollywood88

The ones I drew up were connected via a bridge like you mentioned and the bridge would basically rotate around the limb tip. I never continued on with the idea from the thought that it wouldn't be strong enough and the amount of machining would cost too much to be practical for a company to produce. Guess I was wrong.


----------



## Jim58

SonnyThomas said:


> Something about the cable shoot through system must warrant ignoring on the part of the major bow companies.


The market base for the major bow companies is predominately bow hunting and I think there is a perceived problem with using a shoot through system in a hunting situation. I shoot an OK Absolute 38 and I have had to change the way I load an arrow into the bow, I hold the bow with the stabilizer pointing up and drop the arrow through onto the string (effectively muzzle loading the bow) this is a non issue for me as I'm a target shooter and use a blade style rest, I would imagine it would be quite awkward if you have a full containment style rest.
Looking at the photo's of the Barnsdale bow I would imagine that the cam tracks being outboard of the limbs might make them slightly susceptible to damage.

Cheers, Jim.


----------



## SonnyThomas

Yes, hunting bows are a market base, but so much as has been done with target bows and the major companies avoid the cable shoot through system. 

"Loading" a arrow would be a problem with a shoot through riser and shoot through cables, but one or the other I can't see a problem. I "loaded" my ProElite and many times cleaned the 4 arrow one minute end of the ASA DAIR Indoor target. I just put the arrow through the rise and pulled it back to nock it. For cables only, it would much the same except no shoot through riser.


----------



## ron w

depending on how long ago you came up with the idea, machining processes have changed drastically. I can see how hand machining something like this cam system would be cost prohibitive, but with modern CNC machine centers, it's very feasible. the programing is still expensive to produce, but once produced, fully automated 100% repeatability and essentially no wasted parts, compared to the continuous checking and repeated set up time and mistakes of hand machining is the key element that reflects production cost reduction.
hunting sales vs. target sales was a major concern for OK Archery, when they introduced their DST series, as well. they are slowly proving themselves as being a good decision to build the bows. among target enthusiasts, their bows are considered the top of the pile. 
hopefully in the future, we will see more and more of this type of target bow as example prove to be worth the production investment.


----------



## ron w

I've shot a shoot through rig for years in target and for hunting and never once was disturbed because of a "difficulty" in loading the bow.


----------



## TWesley

SonnyThomas said:


> Well, I've owned 11 Hoyts that I remember  I've owned a lot of different brands, some I didn't care for, and have placed and won with them all. So I know it's the Indian.
> 
> What I was getting at, if a shoot through system is so great why hasn't it made the "Winner's Circle?" Martin had the shoot through system for years and I can't find where it won. Many of the older Martin shooters want the shoot through system back. Just last week I was asked what a set of Nitrous B cams were worth.


I can help you find where it won! This thread is about Barnsdale's new cam, he won Iowa and Vegas in the same year with a shoot through. Despart won Vegas with a Fury X cam he built before selling the patent to Martin. Look up BA Legend's web site. The OK bows are doing well.


----------



## ron w

yes they do win tournaments, more on Europe than here in the states. shoot through rigs are much more popular, there. the other issue is that as bows designed with true center shot technology, they became much more shootable and less sensitive to the issues that shoot-through technology eliminates. it has become a matter of whether you want to pay for something that doesn't really need to be paid for. never the less,....whether absolutely necessary or not, ...there is certainly an advantage to shoot through design. 
all you have to do is shoot one for a while and you'll be convinced.


----------

