# FOC for Traditional



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

You guys have been helpful with my set up so far. Next I'm interested in what FOC the Trad shooters, especially hunters are using. Is there a difference with using aluminum vs carbon and setting up FOC? I'm shooting a 50# Recurve, and want to best stabilize my broadheads. I've not decided on broadhead choice, or carbon vs aluminum yet. I'm going to be using 5 inch feathers as well. Thanks.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

FOC is irrelevant at the distances we bowhunt at and most of us shoot at in general - and as Byron Ferguson and many others have said - if your arrows are tuned - they will virtually always be in the recommended FOC of 11-15%

It is a non-issue.

That being said - my FOC is 12% and my arrows are light weight and fast - 348 grains out of a 47lb bow going 214 fps and they pass through every deer I have shot - even with a mechanical broadhead.

All this FOC, heavy arrow, single bevel heads, etc... is just a way to get you to spend more money on some supposed magical arrow that will kill animals even when you make a lousy shot.

Shoot as light of an arrow as you can that is not excessively loud or voids your bow warranty and you will shoot more accurately and will enjoy shooting more and therefore shoot more and then get even more accurate and want to shoot even more and then get more accurate, etc...


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Urban, FOC topics can open two debates. One being just FOC, or location of center of gravity in relation to shaft drag, iow, steering. That has always been pretty well accepted as what sharp says for hunting, and target being in the higher single digits, though not necessarily dependent on either. Folks like what they like.

"All this FOC" being more in reference to the second debate, EFOC (Extreme FOC), which is more along a debate on increasing FOC by a huge margin to retain the most KE at impact. IOW, lighter to the rear means less flex of the arrow at impact, flex supposedly robbing energy.

If you don't want to get into the latter, which I would advise against for your sake of sanity , just pick a reasonable FOC and go with it.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> You guys have been helpful with my set up so far. Next I'm interested in what FOC the Trad shooters, especially hunters are using.


You can't argue with physics...even though some try, you are wise to ask questions about it.

FOC does play a roll in an arrow's potential penetrating capability just as many other factors do. The exact amount it has is not known for certain....but you can be guareenteed it does have an effect.

Do NOT listen to anyone who says it doesn't matter or is irrelevant.

How important FOC is...is often determined by the animals we hunt and the rest of the gear we will be using.

A whitetail deer is not made out of armor so just about any set up within reason will perform well.

Which ever route you take...just make sure that your arrows end up being tuned to the best of your ability.

Ray :shade:


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

I've shot everything from 7% to 25% FOC. There is no doubt in my mind that it does make a difference. The greater FOC arrows correct faster and generally hold a better line. However for outdoor shooting I like between 12 and 15% maybe as high as 18% if that is where the arrows tune.
The one very noticeable effect with greater FOC is that it requires less fletch to correct, but faster arrows also require less so you eventually reach an area of diminishing returns.

The one thing I do not like is heavy shafting. I prefer the lightest shaft available for the spine required simply because it allows me to run a higher FOC without having excessively heavy arrows. So for me aluminum and any of the "trad" shafts just don't cut it.

-Grant


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> FOC is irrelevant at the distances we bowhunt at and most of us shoot at in general - and as Byron Ferguson and many others have said - if your arrows are tuned - they will virtually always be in the recommended FOC of 11-15%
> 
> It is a non-issue.
> 
> ...


That's utter bull chit. For hunting it generally falls into the norm, which is less than 15%, which is fine, but to say its irrelevant is an inane statement. FOC matters also in Penetration, so much so that light bows benefit almost to an extreme with a hefty forward FOC over heavier poundage bows. You need to learn a little something about this Sharp before you start making very innaccurate pronouncements about which its becoming apparent you know little about.


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

I have killed tons of deer and believe FOC has helped my arrows penetrate deeper on difficult angles or when encountering bone 

To each his own 

I shoot a 520 grain arrow that is about 20 % Foc and going about 193 fps


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Byron Ferguson of the Become The Arrow Fame and incredible shots fame says it is irrelevant, Ken Beck of Black Widow fame says not to worry about it, Easton Archery says that in short range events such as indoor archery or bowhunting it is not significant, as do many others - but that's ok - they better learn somthing from rattus before making such innacurate pronouncements


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Byron Ferguson of the Become The Arrow Fame and incredible shots fame says it is irrelevant, Ken Beck of Black Widow fame says not to worry about it, Easton Archery says that in short range events such as indoor archery or bowhunting it is not significant, as do many others - but that's ok - they better learn somthing from rattus before making such innacurate pronouncements


If that is what they are saying, Sharp, that is exactly right. Since you are their spokes person, email me there email addresses and I'll get the skinny from them directly and to what extent that they have actually studied this or if it is just further bull chit on your part or opinion of THEIR SETUP on their part. Ferguson is shooting 70# of a homemade bow by his son. I know nothing of Black Widow... but if they said that FOC is irrelevant, then I'd like to know to what extent they have actually studied it... my guess is ZERO.


----------



## monsterbuckrick (Aug 14, 2009)

I have always shot the lighter arrows that fall within my spine. I have also done my own tests and found that a lighter arrow at normal hunting yardages 10-30 yds. the lighter arrows penetrated deeper than the heavier arrows. Doesn't make sense to many and myself included. I shot the same distances with the same bow at the same target. Phone books, plywood, gelatin, and a brand new Block target. The broadheads were the same also. I am still trying to find what would be a light arrow that has the most penetration. The only reason why I'm doing this is because I want to. I hunt with light arrows and have pass throughs all the time.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

AMEN monsterbuckrick - my findings exactly - most all this other stuff is based on old wives tales and theories dressed up to look like scientific research and fact.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

rattus - when I get more time I will give you the exact quotes from Become the Arrow - page number and all - the link to Easton's Tuning guide, and explain what Ken Beck told all of us at his first shooting clinic - not that it will matter - but I will - now I am too busy


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> rattus - when I get more time I will give you the exact quotes from Become the Arrow - page number and all - the link to Easton's Tuning guide, and explain what Ken Beck told all of us at his first shooting clinic - not that it will matter - but I will - now I am too busy


No I would prefer that you send me their addresses.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

monsterbuckrick said:


> Doesn't make sense to many and myself included.


There's a reason why it doesn't make sense.

There are more varibles that contribute to an arrow's penetrating capability other than just weight and speed.

One of the most important issues is tuning.

How well were your test arrows tuned to your equipment?
What tuning method did you use to check how well each arrow was tuned to your bow?

Shaft diameter plays a roll.
Point shape plays a roll.
FOC plays a roll.
Type of arrow plays a roll.

Ray :shade:


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

SO.......... Stay within at least withing a reasonable FOC of 10 to 15%. Decide on a shaft and way the options of FOC as it relates to arrow speed, penetration, and stabilization. Interesting. But in short, just tune the arrows good. I've been playing with Stu's dynamic spine calculator in order to find a basic starting point, and I'm gonna go forward from there. Thanks so far......


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

Byron Ferguson - Become The Arrow page 46-47 "The general thinking is 10-15% FOC is hte best balance point for the greatest inflight stability...Arrows properly matched and tuned almost always are within the 10-15% FOC. If your arrows do not fall within that range... (he then gives some ways to solve it.... and then says if they still fly good)..."you have solved the problem -* IF YOU VIEWED IT AS A PROBLEM IN THE FIRST PLACE*"

From the Easton Tuning Guide: 
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...-rC9DQ&usg=AFQjCNGF8JTSeHm0YdDkcW0lletUy18u3A

"In short range events, such as indoor archery, the effect
of F.O.C. is not significant. Other factors affecting arrow
flight are more important to these archers."

Indoor archery is generally consider 30 yards or less - which is what most of us also consider bowhunting ranges

Regarding Ken Beck - at the First Fred Asbell Black Widow Shooting Clinic which I attended Ken Beck - the then owner of Black Widow gave a session on arrow tuning and brought up FOC and said it was irrelevant to bow hunters and that in all of his testing he saw no difference in arrow flight, penetration, anything - wiht different FOC - and told us al not to even worry about it.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> SO.......... Stay within at least withing a reasonable FOC of 10 to 15%. Decide on a shaft and way the options of FOC as it relates to arrow speed, penetration, and stabilization. Interesting. But in short, just tune the arrows good. I've been playing with Stu's dynamic spine calculator in order to find a basic starting point, and I'm gonna go forward from there. Thanks so far......


Yes... :grin: Tune whatever arrow you're going to be shooting... whether extreme FOC or a normal arrow.

The ONLY thing that Sharp has said that is is accurate, is that if you have a tuned arrow that shoots well, shooting at deer sized game you'll probaly at close ranges have little to worry about if you're accurate. However, where he little experience, and in fact has been hostile to, is others actual experience in testing FOC. With light poundage bows, for example 40#, you can get penetration with extreme FOC (over 25%) that equals a 70# bow with the same weight arrows... and probably you'd find that the 70# bow is going FASTER.... to boot as well as higer momentum. Facts are facts, experience is experience... where Sharp and a bunch of others on here express authority, they have no trail travelled to base their pronouncements and *considerable bias* on.


----------



## monsterbuckrick (Aug 14, 2009)

Ray, I'm sure your much smarter than I am when it comes to this topic. My bow was tuned by an Elite dealer who is well known in the tuning arena. The tests I conducted were with the same bow, with the same broadhead. So the variables may be off due to releasing the arrow but they looked to fly the same. I guess a heavier arrow should penetrate deeper, but it did not in my tests. And when I shot I was looking to see how far the difference was. The lighter arrows penetrated alot more.




BLACK WOLF said:


> There's a reason why it doesn't make sense.
> 
> There are more varibles that contribute to an arrow's penetrating capability other than just weight and speed.
> 
> ...


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

monsterbuckrick said:


> Ray, I'm sure your much smarter than I am when it comes to this topic. My bow was tuned by an Elite dealer who is well known in the tuning arena. The tests I conducted were with the same bow, with the same broadhead. So the variables may be off due to releasing the arrow but they looked to fly the same. I guess a heavier arrow should penetrate deeper, but it did not in my tests. And when I shot I was looking to see how far the difference was. The lighter arrows penetrated alot more.


Your arrow is going to do what *your arrow is going to do.* What the issue here is, are folks saying that faster arrows ALWAYS outpenetrate a slower heavier arrow and that is patently false. The other issue here is that a standard, say 7%-15% FOC arrow, has a lot of other things that may contribute to drag and thus affect penetration. Broadhead style also affects penetration in strange ways depending on medium. Lastly, FOC can have *dramatic* influence on penetration especially when relating to heavy arrows with heavy bows versus heavy arrows with light bows. This is where FOC has proven to be potentially advantageous to anyone shooting light bows and heavy arrows... extreme FOC has been shown to have the potential to aid dramatically penetration.

Bottom line is this. Experimentation is valuable in order to learn what works and what doesn't. It also gives you vast understanding of your shooting setup. This can only benefit you, the archer. There are no absolutes in Archery. What works for you may not work for me, and vice versa. The benefits of experimenting with FOC with tuned arrows... meaning a heavier tip will likely mean a stiffer spine arrow with potentially larger diameter if you want to keep or reduce weight.. But this is sometimes, like in my case, irrelevant and the higher overall weights is Life... :grin:

Enjoy what you're doing but don't shy away from knowledge.

Aloha.. :beer:


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

My indoor rig shoots Aluminum and Carbon arrows of about 600gr. The Alloys are around 10% FOC and the Carbon are past 25%.
They are both well tuned on the same limbs and are the same diameter shooting the same head design. The Carbons penetrate easily 50% further.
The carbons penetrate further than my 3D arrows which I shoot from heavier, faster limbs. Actually they easily outperform almost every other arrow there except for a few compound shooters using skinny shafts.

Call me crazy but I'd say that diameter, point design and shaft smoothness plays the largest role in penetrating power.

-Grant


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

grantmac said:


> My indoor rig shoots Aluminum and Carbon arrows of about 600gr. The Alloys are around 10% FOC and the Carbon are past 25%.
> They are both well tuned on the same limbs and are the same diameter shooting the same head design. The Carbons penetrate easily 50% further.
> The carbons penetrate further than my 3D arrows which I shoot from heavier, faster limbs. Actually they easily outperform almost every other arrow there except for a few compound shooters using skinny shafts.
> 
> ...


And therein lies the tale.... :grin:


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

UrbanDeerSlayer

This statement..."_In must hunting situations"_...as it is always used by those who say FOC does not matter is one of the things is causing a lot of the debating...namely because it is implying everyone has typically the same scenario when hunting..same bow...same arrows...same range of game being hunted..same draw weight..same same same...and we all know it is going to be different for each of us...

Having a higher FOC does make improvements..and it is going to be up to each of us to determine if we "need" these improvements or not.

There are just way to many variables to make stupid butted statements like some folks around here do...and yet they love to do this...because most companies like Easton haven't really put out anything to the contrary yet..Other arrow companies have and are starting to see by doing their own testing..

Some people won't never have a need for a heavier than normal FOC...because of a number of reasons but the biggest of these are they may hunt only whitetail deer at a specific yardage..and limit there shots...usually from a fixed stand location...These folks do understand that this isn't how everyone hunts...and in their arrogance dismiss any other way of hunting...What may work perfectly fine for them..can and has failed miserably with others in a different situation.. 

If you are hunting in a limited way from 1 fixed position..chances are..you too are limiting your shots..and most likely won't never need to expand your set up...however...if you ever put your feet on the ground..hunt at varied ranges..and varied types of game..at varied angles...you will see real quick just how much having a higher than "normal" FOC matters...

My suggestion is to be realistic in your approach to the matter and research it more than just a causal glance on a few forums...if you are planning on hunting out of the "typical" fashion as so many folks like to call it...then it matters even more to you..

My personal views is while hunting in this country with the bows I have.. I want a arrow that has a EFOC of 18%-25%..and not be too heavy to loose a lot of trajectory up too 40-50 yards..I hunt up to 50 yards with my bows...so I am not what some of these guys call "normal" by any means..My bows have a muzzle velocity of 185 fps to 212 fps. and my arrows range from 400 grains up to 660 grains..with bow weights of 55 lbs to 68 lbs..I know at the further ranges I sometimes hunt..I will have less tail whip when the arrows begins it path through the animal..which will keep it on a straight line to the vitals.....it will also allow a better chance of not glancing off if bone is encountered..as what happens in many cases with a arrow that is in the so called "normal" range of FOC...We don't always get a picture perfect broadside shot at a animal that is standing still looking the other way that some of these holier than though types say is the only way anyone should hunt...I have found out recently...by having a better tuned arrow and by increasing the FOC up to 18-19% has allowed me to use smaller fletchings...this has helped me at longer yardages by improving my trajectory...and has allowed a good speed increase...which has bumped up my energy numbers as well...

So...do you need a high or higher than "normal" FOC to your set up...only you can make that determination after you have your bow/arrow combination set up for perfect arrow flight from the bow...so...play around with the numbers...and be honest with your self on how you hunt..or plan to hunt..and all of the factors regarding your style and when you will or won't release a arrow...and ignore those that try their hardest to tell you or show you 
that you don't need to worry about it...because they are ignorant arrogant jerks that don't have a clue as to what you actually need...only what they need or use...or what their idols use..

Mac


----------



## monsterbuckrick (Aug 14, 2009)

Mac, very well stated. I am doing just that. I am doing my own testing using my own variables and deciding on an arrow that suits me best. I am still looking, and maybe I will never find "The One" But it is alot of fun doing it because I love to shoot. Thanks for your insight


----------



## benofthehood (May 18, 2011)

I decide what broadhead I am going to use then choose my arrow accordingly by spine . Its , IMHO , a matter of tuning rather than targeting a specific arrow weight / efoc .

I have often used heavy arrows and had great results with mid weight arrows out of my longbows ... I have also had great results with what some would call "light arrows" @8gpp out of my curves . Of course Some of this was before we discovered EFOC and carbon shafting etc ... but to be honest I am not sure I could have killed those animals any deader ......

Some bows like heavier arrows [ reflexed Hillstyle bows ... ] wheras other bows [ like my ILF curves] shoot arrows of all weight well . 

Here in Oz we are often chasing big critters ... tough hogs , scrub bulls and sometimes even water buffalo ... As such people who have been around a while tend to match their equipment to the game they are chasing ... if it was just whitetails [ a smaller version of our fallow deer perhaps ? ] , I would think that decisions on arrow weight and efoc were a choice , not a necessity .


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

monsterbuckrick said:


> Ray, I'm sure your much smarter than I am when it comes to this topic.


I HATE the sound of that. Let's just I may be more experienced in this area.



monsterbuckrick said:


> My bow was tuned by an Elite dealer who is well known in the tuning arena.


What exactly did he do to tune your bow?

When most dealers set up a compound bow...they generally do a basic set-up adjusting the timing, requested draw weight and draw length, arrow rest and cushion plunger position and nock position. After the dealer has done that....it's usually up to the archer to fine tune it with their choice of arrow. The dealer may or may not have paper tuned it with the arrows you have chosen and the point weight. 



monsterbuckrick said:


> The tests I conducted were with the same bow, with the same broadhead. So the variables may be off due to releasing the arrow but they looked to fly the same.


If you use arrows of different spine or length out of the same bow with the same broadhead. You will get different results and they will not fly the same out of the bow even though you may not physically see it. This is one of the reasons why bareshaft tuning is important.

The more you understand all the physics involved in determining an arrow's penetrating potential...the more you realize it's not just based on a couple of things.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Lil Okie (Mar 25, 2008)

monsterbuckrick said:


> I have always shot the lighter arrows that fall within my spine. I have also done my own tests and found that a lighter arrow at normal hunting yardages 10-30 yds. the lighter arrows penetrated deeper than the heavier arrows. Doesn't make sense to many and myself included. I shot the same distances with the same bow at the same target. Phone books, plywood, gelatin, and a brand new Block target. The broadheads were the same also. I am still trying to find what would be a light arrow that has the most penetration. The only reason why I'm doing this is because I want to. I hunt with light arrows and have pass throughs all the time.


Are you doing this with a recurve or longbow? Just wondering


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

sharpbroadhead said:


> Byron Ferguson of the Become The Arrow Fame and incredible shots fame says it is irrelevant, Ken Beck of Black Widow fame says not to worry about it, Easton Archery says that in short range events such as indoor archery or bowhunting it is not significant, as do many others - but that's ok - they better learn somthing from rattus before making such innacurate pronouncements


Sharp I don't care what anybody uses as long as they get the results they want they should be pleased 

You quote a lot about what Easton suggests but when Fred Eichler went after his big bears he used more FOC in his arrows 

If I'm not mistaken Fred works for Easton and knows more about big game hunting with a stick bow than any body on here 

So if it's good for Fred it's good for me. Didn't he just finish the North American 28 with a recurve that at his long draw pulled under 60 pounds


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

monsterbuckrick said:


> Mac, very well stated. I am doing just that. I am doing my own testing using my own variables and deciding on an arrow that suits me best. I am still looking, and maybe I will never find "The One" But it is alot of fun doing it because I love to shoot. Thanks for your insight


Your welcome...

Everyone gets pretty wound up regarding this topic...and it always seems to get turned into a raging debate when it doesn't need to be. There is enough evidence available to show the real benefits of bumping up the FOC of a arrow available to everyone, that it really doesn't have to turn into a fight every time the subject comes up. I don't give a rats butt if your a target shooter only killing foam & paper...or if you are going to Africa to hunt the big 5...everyone will have a different need for their own set up..and what and how they are doing it.

If we just believe the accepted generalities...we will never expand our understanding of the difference we all have..and remain woefully blinded by our own tunnel vision..

Our bows are varied in all aspects...and in efficiency...from those using the most modern light weight rigs and light weight arrows for target shooting and hunting with them ...to those using 100 lb behemoths casting 1000 grain telephone poles through the toughest most dangerous game on the planet...and the only real constant we all should use as a generality and strive for...is to have perfect flight to the target..and if that target is a living animal..then in the best ideal situation completely through it and out the other side..No 2 situations are ever going to be the same for every archer on the planet.. 

Mac


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

grantmac said:


> Call me crazy but I'd say that diameter, point design and shaft smoothness plays the largest role in penetrating power.


OK, crazy :wink: Seriously...I agree that those can ABSOLUTELY factor in but I don't believe they play the largest role.

My guess would be between these if broadheads weren't being considered: tuning, arrow speed, arrow weight and shaft diameter.

One thing I know for certain...it would be very expensive and time cosuming to prove how much each one actually factors in.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Lil Okie said:


> Are you doing this with a recurve or longbow? Just wondering


Based on his signiture...I believe he's using a compound bow...but I could be wrong.

Ray :shade:


----------



## J. Wesbrock (Dec 17, 2003)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> SO.......... Stay within at least withing a reasonable FOC of 10 to 15%. Decide on a shaft and way the options of FOC as it relates to arrow speed, penetration, and stabilization. Interesting. But in short, just tune the arrows good. I've been playing with Stu's dynamic spine calculator in order to find a basic starting point, and I'm gonna go forward from there. Thanks so far......


It sounds like you have a good handle on things. The rest of these arguments are just background noise.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

Wow. Quite a confusing topic. At this point, I have been shooting a variety of arrows both carbon and aluminum, testing spines and general flight. Once I find one that I am comfortable with, I suppose I will begin the more detailed tuning process and factor in FOC at that time. I am focusing my tuning efforts on the basis that I will hunting with this set up by this fall. So, I appreciate everybody's input at this time. Thanks.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

i know this...even as a kid i only had to mess up one time before i learned to carve the point on the fat end of my sapling spears. :laugh:

and i'm loving the way my longbow shoots with the 18% FOC on my 30" long GT3555's with 175gr points..suckers are flying like a cartoon arrow. :laugh:


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

As you add weight you will change the tune of your bow so now is the time to figure out what works


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

FOC = full of crap. How many people shoot well enough to tell any difference.


----------



## JINKSTER (Mar 19, 2011)

Destroyer said:


> FOC = full of crap. How many people shoot well enough to tell any difference.


I can't..but my trad bows do.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JParanee said:


> As you add weight you will change the tune of your bow so now is the time to figure out what works


:thumbs_up

Choose a broadhead and see what weights they come in and than choose a spine or spines that can accomodate what you want to use. You want to start the tuning process by picking the correct shafts based on the weight of the broadhead you will be using.

I don't want to see UrbanDeerSlayer get his arrows perfectly tuned to the best of his ability...and than have to change something because he's reconsidering FOC which will require that he start over from scratch if he can't cut the arrows down in length. 

FOC will not make a huge difference on whitetail deer...especially if the arrows are tuned.

Ray :shade:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Destroyer said:


> FOC = full of crap. How many people shoot well enough to tell any difference.


 You're right... you might miss the significance of it.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

JINKSTER said:


> i know this...even as a kid i only had to mess up one time before i learned to carve the point on the fat end of my sapling spears. :laugh:
> 
> and i'm loving the way my longbow shoots with the 18% FOC on my 30" long GT3555's with 175gr points..suckers are flying like a *cartoon arrow*. :laugh:


----------



## rogbo (Jan 2, 2004)

JINKSTER said:


> i know this...even as a kid i only had to mess up one time before i learned to carve the point on the fat end of my sapling spears. :laugh:
> 
> and i'm loving the way my longbow shoots with the 18% FOC on my 30" long GT3555's with 175gr points..suckers are flying like a cartoon arrow. :laugh:



It would be difficult to do with even a "normal" length draw (say 28") but for grins, try to build yourself an arrow that tunes and sports an FOC in the high 20's to low 30% and see if that isn't even better.


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

I havent nailed down arrow length yet because I've noticed an increase in my draw length as I've been shooting alot, almost everyday. I'm pulling a 50# recurve, with a current draw length around 28 1/4 inches. When I started it was about 27 inches. I can now consistently hit a small block target at 20 yards without flinging an arrow into the hillside. So my form is gaining consistency. I'm leaning towards an arrow around 30 inches. Getting ready to cut em, feather em up, and start tuning. Going to attempt bare shaft and broadhead tuning as well. Keep up the comments, appreciate all the input.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> I havent nailed down arrow length yet because I've noticed an increase in my draw length as I've been shooting alot, almost everyday. I'm pulling a 50# recurve, with a current draw length around 28 1/4 inches. When I started it was about 27 inches. I can now consistently hit a small block target at 20 yards without flinging an arrow into the hillside. So my form is gaining consistency. I'm leaning towards an arrow around 30 inches. Getting ready to cut em, feather em up, and start tuning. Going to attempt bare shaft and broadhead tuning as well. Keep up the comments, appreciate all the input.


Don't cut them and leave one or two bare. Cutting should be the last resort.

-Grant


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

This may sound stupid, if you glue in inserts to a 31.5 inch shaft and then decide to shorten it later how do you do that without scrapping the insert? Or is there some temporary glueing method I don't know about. I usually epoxy but that will mean losing the insert if I cut shorter later.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> This may sound stupid, if you glue in inserts to a 31.5 inch shaft and then decide to shorten it later how do you do that without scrapping the insert? Or is there some temporary glueing method I don't know about. I usually epoxy but that will mean losing the insert if I cut shorter later.


Hot melt glue is in my opinion, initially more appropriate for most jobs. Once you've got everything settled, if you want to go permanent then epoxy might be the ticket.

Much Aloha... :beer:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> This may sound stupid, if you glue in inserts to a 31.5 inch shaft and then decide to shorten it later how do you do that without scrapping the insert? Or is there some temporary glueing method I don't know about. I usually epoxy but that will mean losing the insert if I cut shorter later.


To add to what rattus said....as an option...you can also cut the back of the arrow if you need or want to.

Problems can occur when the arrow is tapered, has a wrap on it or is dipped.

Ray :shade:


----------



## UrbanDeerSlayer (Feb 10, 2012)

rattus58 said:


> Hot melt glue is in my opinion, initially more appropriate for most jobs. Once you've got everything settled, if you want to go permanent then epoxy might be the ticket.
> 
> Much Aloha... :beer:


So, basically, you can reheat the arrow, loosen up the hot glue and pull out the insert without damaging the shaft? OK that makes sense. That would allow easier length adjustments, Thanks. 

I got used to epoxy after I lost a few crossbow inserts in my broadhead target. Arrow was stuck in the broadhard target so badly, I had to pull so hard to get it out that the insert let loose, leaving the broadhead and insert behind.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> So, basically, you can reheat the arrow, loosen up the hot glue and pull out the insert without damaging the shaft? OK that makes sense. That would allow easier length adjustments, Thanks.
> 
> I got used to epoxy after I lost a few crossbow inserts in my broadhead target. Arrow was stuck in the broadhard target so badly, I had to pull so hard to get it out that the insert let loose, leaving the broadhead and insert behind.


You need to becareful with heating up carbon arrows...it can weaken them or cause them to splinter if they get to hot.

Ray :shade:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BLACK WOLF said:


> You need to becareful with heating up carbon arrows...it can weaken them or cause them to splinter if they get to hot.
> 
> Ray :shade:


My arrows are carbon.... well precarbon anyways... :grin:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

rattus58 said:


> My arrows are carbon.... well precarbon anyways... :grin:


Yeah...yeah...I know exactly what you mean :wink: BUT...if you have ever heated up what we now call modern carbon arrows with direct flame you will know what I'm saying is true.

Ray :shade:


----------



## voodoofire1 (Jan 24, 2006)

yep, don't heat the arrow!!... leave the point in and apply the heat to that, it will in turn transfer that heat to the insert, then to the glue, use pliers to take em out....just so you don't get hotfingers.......


----------



## tiny52 (Dec 31, 2010)

monsterbuckrick said:


> I have always shot the lighter arrows that fall within my spine. I have also done my own tests and found that a lighter arrow at normal hunting yardages 10-30 yds. the lighter arrows penetrated deeper than the heavier arrows. .


same here


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

voodoofire1 said:


> yep, don't heat the arrow!!... leave the point in and apply the heat to that, it will in turn transfer that heat to the insert, then to the glue, use pliers to take em out....just so you don't get hotfingers.......


I'd STILL be careful of over-heating the insert.

I do use this method to take out inserts...but if you over heat it...it will damage the carbon arrow. Just use a little heat at a time until your can turn the insert within the arrow.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

UrbanDeerSlayer said:


> So, basically, you can reheat the arrow, loosen up the hot glue and pull out the insert without damaging the shaft? OK that makes sense. That would allow easier length adjustments, Thanks.
> 
> I got used to epoxy after I lost a few crossbow inserts in my broadhead target. Arrow was stuck in the broadhard target so badly, I had to pull so hard to get it out that the insert let loose, leaving the broadhead and insert behind.


If you use a hot melt glue you can remove them, but apply the heat to a point screwed into the arrow, not the arrow itself. The arrow tip will transfer the heat to the glue.

If you are drawing over 28" you might not even have to cut them if they are close in spine. Changing point weight works pretty well for fine tuning and is reversible.

I'm not sure if I have an opinion on the HFOC debate, I've never done any serious experimenting so I'm sure not going to contradict those who have. My arrows usually end up on the high side of average (400 spine, 225 gr. points, full length carbon shafts from a [email protected] recurve) and work fine. My feeling is that there should be some mechanical advantage to a HFOC set up, but that few of us will notice it in practicality. I guarantee though that if I was hunting anything bigger than deer I would be doing a lot more serious research...:wink:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Yeah...yeah...I know exactly what you mean :wink: BUT...if you have ever heated up what we now call modern carbon arrows with direct flame you will know what I'm saying is true.
> 
> Ray :shade:


 Hehe.... yeah and I can cook marshmallows wit mine... :grin:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

tiny52 said:


> same here


Again...I don't doubt that...BUT...you have to take into consideration everything that may be different between the arrows you are testing. There's more to an arrow's penetrating potential other than just speed and weight.

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

rattus58 said:


> Hehe.... yeah and I can cook marshmallows wit mine... :grin:


Dude...it's becoming camping weather here....and you just made me think of smores. Yum....yum!

Ray :shade:


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

BLACK WOLF said:


> and you just made me think of smores. Yum....yum!


What is a 'smores'?


----------



## JParanee (Oct 13, 2009)

Make up one arrow no feathers glue your insert in 

Shoot arrow 

If it is flying soft ( tail left ) pull off nock cut a 1/2inch off as you get close cut 1/4 inch put on nock shoot again . Repeat as necessary . If arrow at full length is to stiff drop down a spine start again 

Don't mess with heating up arrow and glueing in and out . Pulling nock is quick and clean . Once you have the one perfect arrow cut them all fletch them and shoot 

Just my way and I think the quickest and simplest 

Good luck


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Destroyer said:


> What is a 'smores'?


Marshmallow n graham crackers.... :grin:


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

rattus58 said:


> Marshmallow n graham crackers.... :grin:


Forgot the chocolate...best part.


----------



## grantmac (May 31, 2007)

To remove inserts which have been hot-glued into carbon arrows just put them into a shallow pan of water a bring it to a boil. Water cannot be brought to a high enough temp to hurt oven cured carbon products (all arrows). I've never hurt a shaft removing components this way.

-Grant


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

grantmac said:


> To remove inserts which have been hot-glued into carbon arrows just put them into a shallow pan of water a bring it to a boil. Water cannot be brought to a high enough temp to hurt oven cured carbon products (all arrows). I've never hurt a shaft removing components this way.


:thumbs_up

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Easykeeper said:


> Forgot the chocolate...best part.


Dude....how could you forget the chocolate? That's definitely the best part :wink:

Ray :shade:


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

JParanee said:


> Make up one arrow no feathers glue your insert in
> 
> Shoot arrow
> 
> ...


:thumbs_up

That's basically how I do it also....WHEN my arrows are raw and have no dip or wraps on them.

Ray :shade:


----------



## Destroyer (Sep 11, 2009)

rattus58 said:


> Marshmallow n graham crackers.... :grin:





Easykeeper said:


> Forgot the chocolate...best part.


Sounds nice, where did the name come from? 'Some mores'??


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Destroyer said:


> Sounds nice, where did the name come from? 'Some mores'??


I've never thought much about...but...by God...I think you may be onto something.

Makes sense to me.

Ray :shade:


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BLACK WOLF said:


> I've never thought much about...but...by God...I think you may be onto something.
> 
> Makes sense to me.
> 
> Ray :shade:


that's what I was thinkin too.... :grin:


----------



## Easykeeper (Jan 2, 2003)

Destroyer said:


> Sounds nice, where did the name come from? 'Some mores'??


That's what I've heard...give me some more...now with a mouthful and spewing sticky bits...gimme s'more...


----------



## Boberau (Dec 15, 2009)

"In short range events, such as indoor archery, the effect
of F.O.C. is not significant. Other factors affecting arrow
flight are more important to these archers."

This has been my experience at bowhunting ranges with tests as controlled as I am capable of. I even tested at really short range, in case I get a 5 yard shot at a whitetail. Same results - insignifant. I'm with Easton on this one.

And, for the guys going from wheels to trad, you really should consider whether or not there has been a change in the laws of physics between those two universes.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

Boberau said:


> "In short range events, such as indoor archery, the effect
> of F.O.C. is not significant. Other factors affecting arrow
> flight are more important to these archers."
> 
> ...


 What does easton say about penetration with a 50 pound bow and a 550 grain arrow with a normal FOC, versus say 550 grain arrow with a well forward FOC, and what did easton say about a 50 pound bow with a normal FOC versus a 40 pound bow with a 550 grain arrow and well forward or extreme FOC? And we're talking penetration here.... aren't we?


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

rattus58 said:


> What does easton say about penetration with a 50 pound bow and a 550 grain arrow with a normal FOC, versus say 550 grain arrow with a well forward FOC, and what did easton say about a 50 pound bow with a normal FOC versus a 40 pound bow with a 550 grain arrow and well forward or extreme FOC? And we're talking penetration here.... aren't we?


Well...anyone can pick up the phone and call Richard Stock...at 1-801.539.1433 at Easton and ask for themselves...I did...and while he would not give me any specifics of the above weights...did say this to me 15 minutes ago..

A higher than normal FOC will aid in penetration by help keeping the knock behind the point..and also..a heavier shaft will penetrate "better" than a lighter weight shaft...Since they have been building arrows for 90 some years...you would think people would just call and ask them about all of this..instead of trying their hardest to prove otherwise...

He told me also...that they have tested extensively..and have done all kinds of high speed filming of what a arrow does on impact that shows this...so.....I asked if they would ever release any of this and post it on the web site so all could see and get a better understanding of it..and he said it wasn't up to him..but he would see if they would..I gave them my contact information...and told him I would be glad to do this for them if they wanted..He said he would check and let me know..Hopefully he will...

So...for the OP or anyone else...the contact name and number is there...call and talk to them..

Mac


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

MAC 11700 said:


> Well...anyone can pick up the phone and call Richard Stock...at 1-801.539.1433 at Easton and ask for themselves...I did...and while he would not give me any specifics of the above weights...did say this to me 15 minutes ago..
> 
> A higher than normal FOC will aid in penetration by help keeping the knock behind the point..and also..a heavier shaft will penetrate "better" than a lighter weight shaft...Since they have been building arrows for 90 some years...you would think people would just call and ask them about all of this..instead of trying their hardest to prove otherwise...
> 
> ...


:grin: Amazing how the "World Turns" aint it.... :grin: Thanks for call and the update.

Much Aloha,

Tom


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

LOL - so is Easton advocating EFOC? Or is he saying that a higher FOC is better for hunting within the ranges that Easton actually recommends - 10-15% - hmmmm? And if he is recommending more than that - why has Easton not updated their recommendations for hunting shafts? See how data and information can be falsified? Sure easton recommends a higher FOC for hunting - they recommend 10-15% for hunting which is higher than what they recommend for say an indoor 300 round which is 7-9%.

People have been hunting all sorts of game - from African to North American with 10-15% FOC in fact - for thousands of years man has hunted without EFOC - so if there is a difference in penetration - it must be minimal.

I don't care what anyone says - extremes are rarely good - virtue is almost always in the middle


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> LOL - so is Easton advocating EFOC? Or is he saying that a higher FOC is better for hunting within the ranges that Easton actually recommends - 10-15% - hmmmm? And if he is recommending more than that - why has Easton not updated their recommendations for hunting shafts? See how data and information can be falsified? Sure easton recommends a higher FOC for hunting - they recommend 10-15% for hunting which is higher than what they recommend for say an indoor 300 round which is 7-9%.
> 
> People have been hunting all sorts of game - from African to North American with 10-15% FOC in fact - for thousands of years man has hunted without EFOC - so if there is a difference in penetration - it must be minimal.
> 
> I don't care what anyone says - extremes are rarely good - virtue is almost always in the middle


 Again Sharp..... you need to do the research before you express a PERSONAL OPINION. http://www.alaskabowhunting.com/PR/Ashby_Papua_New_Guinea_Bows_and_Arrows.pdf For Starters..... and the research HAS been done on penetration and the effects are well known.... Why don't you just accept the fact that you like to do things your way, and others prefer a more efficient way that is not as written by Sharp... and you know... the more you make pronouncement, the duller you become.


----------



## sharpbroadhead (Feb 19, 2004)

LOL - What Ashby has done is anything but research - the "arrows" used by those in the "study" you linked to are more like spears than arrows that we use - and anyone who is honest can admit as much.

Ashby himself has admitted that before carbon arrows - EFOC was not even possible - and I quote:

_Carbon shafts offer great stiffness at low mass, with forgiving
flexional characteristics. *I’ve found no shafting, other than
carbon, giving good flight at Extreme FOC.* Carbon shafts
allow unprecedented FOC with exceptional flight._

the above quote can be found here: http://www.alaskabowhunting.com/PR/Ashby_EFOC.pdf

believe it or not I have read Asby's "research" - just becaues I don't agree with it does not mean that I have not read it.


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

sharpbroadhead said:


> LOL - What Ashby has done is anything but research - the "arrows" used by those in the "study" you linked to are more like spears than arrows that we use - and anyone who is honest can admit as much.
> 
> Ashby himself has admitted that before carbon arrows - EFOC was not even possible - and I quote:
> 
> ...


You know sharp... the reason you have no credibility is that you can't see facts for what they are. Did you not bring up ancient or primitives? Yes. Have you talked to Ashby? Have you contacted him? I have. So I have his take on this. Do you? No... you have your take on his extensive work... and whether you admit or not his study on FOC, it is clearly research.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

sharpbroadhead said:


> LOL - What Ashby has done is anything but research -


And by your own standards of judging his....do you really think what you have done is research???

:laugh::jeez::eek2::set1_rolf2:
:caked::bartstush:

Ray :shade:


----------



## MAC 11700 (Feb 22, 2011)

sharpbroadhead said:


> LOL - so is Easton advocating EFOC? Or is he saying that a higher FOC is better for hunting within the ranges that Easton actually recommends - 10-15% - hmmmm? And if he is recommending more than that - why has Easton not updated their recommendations for hunting shafts? *See how data and information can be falsified?* Sure easton recommends a higher FOC for hunting - they recommend 10-15% for hunting which is higher than what they recommend for say an indoor 300 round which is 7-9%.
> 
> People have been hunting all sorts of game - from African to North American with 10-15% FOC in fact - for thousands of years man has hunted without EFOC - so if there is a difference in penetration - it must be minimal.
> 
> I don't care what anyone says - extremes are rarely good - virtue is almost always in the middle


First off Ken...there is no falsification of anything...and for you to even open your mouth and say that..is a direct personal attack on me...I posted the techs name..and their phone number....Read what I said..not what you want it to say..

Second..call the frigging number yourself and speak to who I spoke to...*that is exactly why I posted it.*..and before you open your mouth and call anyone a liar again boy...asked him what he said...I asked him if I could quote him here on what he said...and he said yes I could...Maybe 1 day you will get it...but I sincerely doubt that you ever will since it doesn't match anything you or your idols have to say.Easton's hunting arrows are heavier than their target arrows...everyone knows it who bothers to look...but nooooooo you just have to keep it up no matter what..BTW Ken...*WHO SAID ANYTHING ABOUT EXTREMES KEN...WHO SAID ANYTHING ABOUT EFOC...* No one did...heavier doesn't mean EXTREMES...it means heavier...you have to go above 19% to be considered EFOC...and no...they haven't posted on their site about it...and I said that..and asked why...and he said it wasn't up to him...maybe they will...maybe they won't...but this is what I was told..so...believe it or not...I don't really give a crap....

Mac


----------



## rattus58 (Jul 9, 2007)

BLACK WOLF said:


> And by your own standards of judging his....do you really think what you have done is research???
> 
> :laugh::jeez::eek2::set1_rolf2:
> :caked::bartstush:
> ...


Well I thoroughly researched my opinions of sharp and I've come to the inescapable conclusion that..... :grin:


----------



## Double S (Mar 30, 2008)

Time to move on. Thread closed.


----------

