# testing a new type of carbon limb.



## steve morley

I think it was the nock that gave the extra speed :wink:

Interesting results, good to see bowyers still pushing the limits. 

I'm wondering what will happen when Graphene becomes commercially viable and if it can be used in future limb technology (it's the lightest and strongest material ever measured.)


----------



## GEREP

250 fps at 28" with 8.5 gpp.

There are going to be a lot of bowyers wanting to rent your chronograph.



KPC


----------



## turbonockguy

GEREP said:


> 250 fps at 28" with 8.5 gpp.
> 
> There are going to be a lot of bowyers wanting to rent your chronograph.
> 
> 
> 
> KPC


I do not believe it is the chronograph's fault. Arvid had similar results with this limb material on his Fita bow.
I talked to him last night and he gave me the numbers but I am not sure I remember them accurately.
I do remember with his fita setup he can go from 30 yds to 100 with only a 2 inch difference in his sight settings.


----------



## Aronnax

I don't want to be "that guy" but unless my math is totally wrong, a 390gr arrow @ 252 is almost 55KE. Out of a 46lb bow... A border super recurve stores 1.1 - 1.2ish (I think, recalling from memory, could be wrong) ft-lbs per lb draw weight, so if I use 46lb draw weight x 1.2 that's only _storing_ 55lbs ke. And you are getting 55KE into the arrow... Unless you are ripping apart the fabric of space and time, 100% efficiency is impossible, so you must be storing even more energy than the border guys... Normal bows are doing good to put .75ke's into the arrow per lb draw weight.

Can you post a detailed draw force curve of the test bow? I'd like to calculate the stored energy and the efficiency of the bow.

BM


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Graphene is super light because it full of air, honeycomb cell. In itself it's super strong. Lamination to wood maybe problematic, unless it chemically bonded. 
Unless, the limbs weight under 150 gram each, I think that what Borders weigh, then other factors are in play here.
So, I am going with you Steve it's the nocks.
Dan


----------



## steve morley

DDSHOOTER said:


> Graphene is super light because it full of air, honeycomb cell.
> Dan


From what I understood it's just very flat/thin.

_"It is the thinnest compound known to man at one atom thick, the lightest material known (with 1 square meter coming in at around 0.77 milligrams), the strongest compound discovered (between 100-300 times stronger than steel and with a tensile stiffness of 150,000,000 psi)"_

I'm sure when the price comes down if will find it's way into Risers/limbs.


----------



## Aronnax

steve morley said:


> From what I understood it's just very flat/thin.
> 
> _"It is the thinnest compound known to man at one atom thick, the lightest material known (with 1 square meter coming in at around 0.77 milligrams), the strongest compound discovered (between 100-300 times stronger than steel and with a tensile stiffness of 150,000,000 psi)"_
> 
> I'm sure when the price comes down if will find it's way into Risers/limbs.


The problem is that while carbon fiber, kevlar, and graphene are wicked strong by themselves, they are pretty useless when used just by themselves. The weak link is still the support structure and epoxy that turns that into an actual usable part. A finished cf part is nowhere near the tensile strength of the carbon fibers by themselves.

Also, I kinda question a source that uses "tensile stiffness", as tensile strength and stiffness are two independent material properties (the latter being defined by its modulus of elasticity). It is possible to have a material that's very strong in tension but has a relatively low modulus of elasticity (stretchy), or a material that's very weak in tension but very, very, stiff (concrete).

BM


----------



## DDSHOOTER

http://www.acsmaterial.com/product.asp?cid=25&id=20

BM's right!

Unless you can get it into the wood tops layers by absorption? 

http://iopscience.iop.org/0957-4484/23/50/505713

Dan


----------



## Stone Bridge

I flat out do not believe 250 fps at 28" and 8.5 gpp. I think this is pure BS. Sorry. You'd be doing well to get over 200. 

Have shot Black Swan bows and never found them unusual in any way. Funny how nobody in competition uses them. Not that I've seen.


----------



## steve morley

Stone Bridge said:


> Have shot Black Swan bows and never found them unusual in any way. Funny how nobody in competition uses them. Not that I've seen.


Most of the good tourney shooters I know, speed is lower in their priorities, it obviously factors in on the equation but getting a good balance between a realistic draw and arrow weight, reliability, smoothness, stability and speed gives a winning tourney combination, if you looking for flat out speed in a Recurve/Longbow normally there is a price to pay that shows up in accuracy.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Steve, can you give us and idea on your limits, FPS. I started to lose points when I went over 280fps on my conventional compound, but when the parallel compound came out. I bump it up to 320fps. That way for 3d's. Target/known distant slower was better.
Dan


----------



## Ol' Bowhunter

Chronographs can very quite a bit if the lighting is not set up properly. They are very sensitive in that regard.

For good/accurate readings, indirect lighting is the best (outside in the shade, or on a cloudy day).

Direct lighting from an incandescent bulb will always make them give a false reading (usually high).

If there is any fluorescent lighting in the room, it can screw with it too. They usually don't read at all under fluorescent lighting.

It appears that the chronograph in the video has direct lighting from an incandescent bulb on the sensors, so it's probably reading higher than what the bow is actually shooting. 

The best way to set up a chronograph indoors is to have it in a dimly lit room with an inferred light kit.


----------



## steve morley

DDSHOOTER said:


> Steve, can you give us and idea on your limits, FPS.
> Dan


I have no idea, I always tuned for the most stable setup possible, then adapted my aim to that setup. I don't even own a Chronograph and never been tempted to try a Chrono at tourneys. 

The 42# Border limbs and 315g arrow gives me 60y point on, even with my stubby short arms  I have experimented with higher draw weights, low strand count and very light arrows, after a lot of trail and error I find that with my current setup the fliers are non existent.


----------



## Ol' Bowhunter

You need one of these.

http://www.3riversarchery.com/Indoor+Light+Kit+for+ProChrono+Digital+Chronograph_i3081_baseitem.html

It uses inferred and would allow you to get the most accurate reading from your chronograph.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter

Totally Unbelievable


----------



## Stone Bridge

Chronographs are very light sensitive. I've owned and used several. Have timed limbs for speed for many years. I only draw 27". Have never shot an arrow over 205 fps at my draw length and about 40#. This with arrows down to 6.1 gpp. To think one more inch of draw length could add 45 fps is ludicrous. To think you could do it at 8.5 gpp is flat out lying or indicative of someone unable to set up a chronograph. It's okay, people, to call such claims bull-bleep. It is.

The fastest limb I ever shot over the screens was a Border Hex 6. I think it was set at 42# with arrows of 320 grains. That got me the above 205 fps. Outstanding for a short draw archer like me. Many very good shooters use Border limbs in competition and they often speak of their chrono speeds. Some get up into the low 220s (fps) but these are men with long draw lengths over 29" getting great power strokes. They also use arrows below 6 gpp at times.

250 fps with an arrow weighing 8.5 gpp and drawn to 28" is impossible on this planet. Maybe on the moon, but not here. I think it's irresponsible for the OP to have made such a claim. It's misleading to many who don't know the score. Most certainly a placed advertisement and reason enough not to consider Black Swan. I feel that strongly about this kind of foolishness.


----------



## Stone Bridge

UtahIdahoHunter said:


> Totally Unbelievable


Good for you to understand this.


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter

Stone Bridge said:


> Good for you to understand this.


Well the original poster actually said "Totally Unbelievable" in the video.


----------



## Easykeeper

Aronnax said:


> I don't want to be "that guy" but unless my math is totally wrong, a 390gr arrow @ 252 is almost 55KE. Out of a 46lb bow... A border super recurve stores 1.1 - 1.2ish (I think, recalling from memory, could be wrong) ft-lbs per lb draw weight, so if I use 46lb draw weight x 1.2 that's only _storing_ 55lbs ke. And you are getting 55KE into the arrow... Unless you are ripping apart the fabric of space and time, 100% efficiency is impossible, so you must be storing even more energy than the border guys... Normal bows are doing good to put .75ke's into the arrow per lb draw weight.
> 
> Can you post a detailed draw force curve of the test bow? I'd like to calculate the stored energy and the efficiency of the bow.
> 
> BM


Ya' gotta love math...:chortle:

Here we go again...:zip:


----------



## Easykeeper

UtahIdahoHunter said:


> Well the original poster actually said "Totally Unbelievable" in the video.


I think he's correct.


----------



## JINKSTER

Okay...I think I figured it out...if you stop the vid at 2.05 and begin rapidly toggling it between play and pause by quickly double tapping your mouse key you will witness a number of things such as...

at the end of 2minutes 6 seconds you will begin to see the arrow move up and down...a lot..and throughout 2min/7 secs.......then at 2min/8sec?...the arrow is loosed and goes through the chrono wildly nock high and too the left and here's...*"the catch"*...

*"ALONG WITH SOME SMALL PARTICLES"*

Now I can only speculate what those small particles may be...the arrow came off the bow so whack I can't rule out pieces of wood from the lumber beside it but....if I had to bet the farm?....I'd say those particles are...

*"STRING WAX"*

Mainly because a bud of mine owns a chrono and when he first got it?....he was attaining ridiculously, "Totally Unbelievable", fast numbers. :laugh:

Turns out?...we found out...that small particles of string wax fly way faster than arrows! :laugh:

and I think that's what we're seeing here.


----------



## Stone Bridge

Interesting, Bill. 

I think I once read an average string alone, without an arrow, can only recover at about 290 fps from a recurve bow at 50# @ 28 inches. That's the string with no load.

Kinda like smokeless gunpowder in its fastest varieties can only expand at 6000 fps. No bullet could ever be pushed faster than that out of rifle barrel. Top rifle loads today are just over 4200 fps with light bullets. Same thing holds true for archery. That string can only recover so fast and place a load like 8.5 gpp on it and that top speed of 290 fps gets cut back tremendously. No way 254 as on the video.


----------



## JParanee

I would never say someone was knowingly making false claims but something is not right 

I have chronoed a lot of very high performance bows I have not seen many that can break 200 @ 10 GPP 

To hit 250 + at 8.5 GPP is like you said unbelievable  

I know you are talking about a different limb from Black Swan but when my buddy ray tested a hybrid these are the numbers he got 

Black Swan Hybrid 48 #'s 


614.4gr 160,160,161 fps avg fps 160 
584.6gr 165,166,165 fps avg fps 165 
447.6gr 186,185,185 fps avg fps 185
419.2gr 189,188,190 fps avg fps 189 
368.6gr 199,198,200 fps avg fps 199


----------



## Stone Bridge

Pedestrian speeds at best for the hybrid Black Swan.

Joe, I have no problem saying the obvious. This guy should have the thread closed if he really doesn't understand what's going on with his chrono. Otherwise he's being conveniently misleading to sell bows. Bad form all around.


----------



## Aronnax

JParanee said:


> I would never say someone was knowingly making false claims but something is not right
> 
> I have chronoed a lot of very high performance bows I have not seen many that can break 200 @ 10 GPP
> 
> To hit 250 + at 8.5 GPP is like you said unbelievable
> 
> I know you are talking about a different limb from Black Swan but when my buddy ray tested a hybrid these are the numbers he got
> 
> Black Swan Hybrid 48 #'s
> 
> 
> 614.4gr 160,160,161 fps avg fps 160
> 584.6gr 165,166,165 fps avg fps 165
> 447.6gr 186,185,185 fps avg fps 185
> 419.2gr 189,188,190 fps avg fps 189
> 368.6gr 199,198,200 fps avg fps 199


Taking the 420gr arrow, which is almost 9gpp it is doing about 34ke which is about .7ft-lbs/lb-df. On par with data from most decent bows I've found.

From the Black Swan website - http://www.blackswanarchery.com/#/hybrid


> To AMO standards using a 60-pound bow, 540-grain arrow and 12-strand Flemish-twist string made of 8190. Drawn to 30 inches AMO. Six arrows were shot from a shooting machine through a 2-cell chronograph with average speed of 225 fps.


Assuming your buddy drew 28" and shot off the fingers, could 2 more inches of draw length on a shooting machine make up 35fps?

I didn't want to play the BS card as I would like to give he OP a chance to back up his claims with some more data.

Again, from the Black Swan home page-


> Black Swan Archery offers four distinctly different bows; all are designed using a proprietary CAD program and the most technically advanced materials available, resulting in the highest dynamic efficiency of any bow to date. The bows are smooth to draw and shoot, forgiving, accurate, and very fast. With IBO speeds of 300 FPS!
> Black Swan Archery…


I don't like when people make unsubstantiated claims esp. when it is referring to something as objective and empirically verifiable as bow stored energy and dynamic efficiency. How are they determining the IBO speeds? Are they just mathematically scaling their AMO speed claims?

BM


----------



## DDSHOOTER

It's not flying wax. 
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=242573 read this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHlwuH0oyPY watch this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPvfOv8ck6M Totally Unbelievable.

64 pound 32" arrow 291 fps horse bow.
Unless you make precision measurements it not precision.
Dan


----------



## JINKSTER

We used to have a local man here who'd come to our club decades ago debuting recurves he made and sold....he'd usually only come to the bigger "Invitational" type shoots and set up his chrono at lunchtime and give a demonstration of how his heavily reflexed "Brown Recluse Recurves" could register 280+ FPS...this was back in the late '80's.

He was about 6'8"s tall and in very good shape, broad shouldered 300+ LBS....a huge man who appeared to be extremely strong...and if memory serves?...looked like he had about a 34" Draw Length that he visually strained to get too.

also if memory serves?...his draw weight was something like 88#s...it was a sight to behold but I don't ever recollect seeing him shoot anything but the 10yd target butt on the front range...for his speed demonstrations.

So is it possible?...i guess so...but out of a 46#er?....tell ya'll what...at this point?...I can't wait for the Sids to weigh in on this! :laugh:


----------



## BWBOW

If I did my math right that puts it a 320 ibo


----------



## stoutstuff

Rather than criticize, I hope it's true! Does Nick have anything to gain form this? Maybe just a faster bow.
If it is true - we all gain in the long run.


----------



## JINKSTER

stoutstuff said:


> Rather than criticize, I hope it's true! Does Nick have anything to gain form this? Maybe just a faster bow.
> If it is true - we all gain in the long run.


As I recall?...the use of linear strand CF is nothing new...matter fact?...it's real old as it's what hoyt used in their first CF limb offerings...which were notorious for splintering on the edges...but that was long before folks figured out a viable process of how to turn linear strand CF into a "Woven CF"....is there anything to gain?...yes...because for some reason?....this thread just reminded me..."It's Tax Time" :laugh:


----------



## Hank D Thoreau

I did some calculations using a linear DFC approximation. Using this approach, the DFC is a right triangle so the potential energy is 1/2 base * height or 1/2 + (draw length - brace height - distance from grip to back of bow) * draw weight

I assumed brace heights from 6 to 9 inches and took the distance from the inside of the grip (where brace height is measured) to the back of the bow as 1 3/4 inches. 

What I found is that efficiency ranged from 131% to 153% for a 390 gr arrow shot at 242 fps from a 46 pound bow at 28 inches of draw. 

The linear DFC will over estimate efficiency because it under estimates stored energy. That is why recurves are faster than D shaped longbows. I made a 14% correction, which came from my most recent experiments with my Border XP10 limbs where a 78% measured efficiency gave me 89% using the linear DFC. Following this correction I got a range of 112% to 132%. 

I would need to see the DFC data points and process the calculations myself before I would accept the reported speed. That is not to say it is not true, but I would have to see what type of extraordinary DFC gave rise to those speeds.

This type of challenge is customary in the scientific community. Check the results for reasonableness, validate the results at another lab. This is the reasonableness check.

If you measure a DFC I will run the data points through my program so that we can get a true measured efficiency. I would also like to add this bow to my test database. If it is truly this fast, I can compare its properties to the other bows that I have either tested myself, or that I have obtained from other sources. This bow should go through a rigorous validation if it is really such a large step above anything else on the market.


----------



## Stone Bridge

Hank, I'll only believe data from this bow if it's in your hands and you are doing the data point collection. For the OP to send you the data is to allow too much trust. Being cynical means you never get hosed in life.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Steve, Stone has a good point. You should do the tests. You have collected more data than any one I know and you got time right now. Hope your getting better bud.
Dan


----------



## Bowmania

I'd be curious, if calculations are correct, as to how long the limbs are going to last.

Bowmania


----------



## kegan

Wow, that makes my bows really, really slow!

Luckily no one seems to notice:lol:


----------



## JParanee

kegan said:


> Wow, that makes my bows really, really slow!
> 
> Luckily no one seems to notice:lol:


They are not slow 

Just real world speeds 

I think I have one of the fastest single strings in existence and I've seen a lot of kit so when claims like this surface I always have reservations 

Again I'm not saying anyone is making false claims just that something is not right 

Turbo nock guy 

Be careful outlandish claims not only hurt Arvid's Prouducts they hurt your own


----------



## turbonockguy

I just got off the phone with Arvid. He sent me a draw force curve I will post later today when I finish re shooting the chrono.
I took it outside and hand shot in sunlight. and got the same numbers as hand shooting with the halogen light indoors.

Outdoors is 5 degrees.

I am going to shoot at 26 inches with a 325 grain gold tip. 
With the shooting machine.
I already did a poundage test on the comparison bows.
Bow #1 Black Swan 41 lbs @ 26 inches
Bow #2 Darton Valiant. 46 lbs @ 26 inches
Bow #3 Martin Hatfield 50 lbs @ 26 inches.
I personally want to see how this bow with the carbon ceramic limbs compares to my old glass lib recurves.

One other issue I checked and compared that may be another reason why the Black Swan has more speed is the mass weight of the limbs themselves. One black swan limb weighs 4.9 ounces. The takedown limb from my Martin Hatfield weighs 8.3 ounces. I am not an engineer but I figure the limb with less mass .should have an advantage??

Right now the furnace repair guys are in the basement.
As soon s they are done I will get to work.When I did the test I did not believe. But so far the chrono seems to be
dead on.

I am not good with charts an graphs or engineering data. perhaps one of the folks here that is really into the engineering could Contact Arvid at Black Swan. He is an engineer. and could explain in better terms than me.
you can most likely reach him through his website. blackswanrchery.com


----------



## kegan

JParanee said:


> They are not slow
> 
> Just real world speeds
> 
> I think I have one of the fastest single strings in existence and I've seen a lot of kit so when claims like this surface I always have reservations
> 
> Again I'm not saying anyone is making false claims just that something is not right
> 
> Turbo nock guy
> 
> Be careful outlandish claims not only hurt Arvid's Prouducts they hurt your own


I was just joking Joe. I suspect the chrono is off. No biggy, I think it happens more than folks notice. 

By those numbers most of the fast compounds today would be "slow" too!


----------



## turbonockguy

I Shoot one of Arvids Bows. I like it. Some of his shooters shoot my nocks. They like them. I do not get paid by Arvid and am not employed by him. We are Friends.
When he sent me the new limbs I was in disbelief of the speeds. 
Arvid just sent me a flow chart he did ( based on the speeds I gave him) and got a 340 ibo with this.








I am not trying to scam or defraud anyone. I have been using this chrono for years. I learned a long time ago that incandesant and flourescent lights do not work. However I have had no problems with Halogins. So in the shooting Today I am using a single 250 watt Halogen. If the weather warms up over the next few days I will do the same test in direct sunlight.

Sadly on this site when anything new comes up the nay sayers go banannas! Remember I am the turbonock Guy. I am used to negativity! And yet for some reason my nocks .work. All I am doing with this thread is posting something that seemed quite amazing to me. 
Hopefully by this evening I will have everything re shot again. and you all can argue some more.
Archers helping Archers????


----------



## steve morley

I've out shot my fair share of Compounds shooting 300fps with my Recurve, speed helps but it's not the holy grail of winning tourneys, it's just one of many factors. :thumbs_up


----------



## Harperman

There has never been a recurve that will shoot even close to 340 f.p.s. @ I.B.O specs, in a scientific test....NEVER....Most of today's compound bows that claim 340 I.B.O. speeds dont shoot 340 f.ps...The bowyer is a known shyster in the Archery world, this kinda mess just shows that some folks make a living, and reputation of greatness by preying on the uninformed...Jim


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> I Shoot one of Arvids Bows. I like it. Some of his shooters shoot my nocks. They like them. I do not get paid by Arvid and am not employed by him. We are Friends.
> When he sent me the new limbs I was in disbelief of the speeds.
> Arvid just sent me a flow chart he did ( based on the speeds I gave him) and got a 340 ibo with this.
> 
> I am not trying to scam or defraud anyone. I have been using this chrono for years. I learned a long time ago that incandesant and flourescent lights do not work. However I have had no problems with Halogins. So in the shooting Today I am using a single 250 watt Halogen. If the weather warms up over the next few days I will do the same test in direct sunlight.
> 
> Sadly on this site when anything new comes up the nay sayers go banannas! Remember I am the turbonock Guy. I am used to negativity! And yet for some reason my nocks .work. All I am doing with this thread is posting something that seemed quite amazing to me.
> Hopefully by this evening I will have everything re shot again. and you all can argue some more.
> Archers helping Archers????


All I want is an accurate draw force curve- measure the draw weight in 1" increments. Measure it all the way up to 32" if you can. Post the brace height of the bow in the test, and verify the arrow weight. Specify the exact draw length used in the test.

I think that pretty much covers it.

Or send the bow to Hank and have him test it...

You have to accept that you can't make a claim like that a not have it challenged. If you are going to make such an extreme claim, you have to do the leg work to support the claim with data that proves it. 

BM


----------



## benzy

> Or send the bow to Hank and have him test it...


This


----------



## turbonockguy

JParanee said:


> I would never say someone was knowingly making false claims but something is not right
> 
> I have chronoed a lot of very high performance bows I have not seen many that can break 200 @ 10 GPP
> 
> To hit 250 + at 8.5 GPP is like you said unbelievable
> 
> I know you are talking about a different limb from Black Swan but when my buddy ray tested a hybrid these are the numbers he got
> 
> Black Swan Hybrid 48 #'s
> 
> 
> 614.4gr 160,160,161 fps avg fps 160
> 584.6gr 165,166,165 fps avg fps 165
> 447.6gr 186,185,185 fps avg fps 185
> 419.2gr 189,188,190 fps avg fps 189
> 368.6gr 199,198,200 fps avg fps 199


This is a brand new limb. I only got 200 fps with the original limbs from arvid.


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> Okay...I think I figured it out...if you stop the vid at 2.05 and begin rapidly toggling it between play and pause by quickly double tapping your mouse key you will witness a number of things such as...
> 
> at the end of 2minutes 6 seconds you will begin to see the arrow move up and down...a lot..and throughout 2min/7 secs.......then at 2min/8sec?...the arrow is loosed and goes through the chrono wildly nock high and too the left and here's...*"the catch"*...
> 
> *"ALONG WITH SOME SMALL PARTICLES"*
> 
> Now I can only speculate what those small particles may be...the arrow came off the bow so whack I can't rule out pieces of wood from the lumber beside it but....if I had to bet the farm?....I'd say those particles are...
> 
> *"STRING WAX"*
> 
> Mainly because a bud of mine owns a chrono and when he first got it?....he was attaining ridiculously, "Totally Unbelievable", fast numbers. :laugh:
> 
> Turns out?...we found out...that small particles of string wax fly way faster than arrows! :laugh:
> 
> and I think that's what we're seeing here.


I do not use string wax in a solid form. I use a liquid that soaks into the strings. a carnuba and beeswax blend mixed with Alcohol that I mix up.


----------



## ghostgoblin22

interesting thread, tagged for later


----------



## ghostgoblin22

i really hope its true, this really would be revolutionizing archery....unlike what hoyt claimed to say they did


----------



## longbowdude

turbonockguy said:


> This is a brand new limb. I only got 200 fps with the original limbs from arvid.



How about a video showing you testing the poundage of both limbs then shooting both limbs. If one shows 50 fps faster than the other then you might be on to something.


----------



## kegan

The president of our local club shoots a Hoyt Carbon Element or whatever it is. He has it set to 54# at his 31" draw. Shooting a 400-ish gr arrow he's getting 255 fps. 

Is it more reasonable to believe that your chrono is off or that this new material suddenly defies the laws of physics?


----------



## ghostgoblin22

i would like to see you shoot it yourself instead of the machine, and do it outside, i own a chrono and i know how it can be altered with quite easily and can run numbers high


----------



## turbonockguy

longbowdude said:


> How about a video showing you testing the poundage of both limbs then shooting both limbs. If one shows 50 fps faster than the other then you might be on to something.


I will have a video up here in about an hour showing thre new bow at 41 lbs and my Darton at 46 lbs. If I have time tomorrow I wil put the old limbs on and do a comparison. thanks for the suggestion.


----------



## JINKSTER

turbonockguy said:


> I do not use string wax in a solid form. I use a liquid that soaks into the strings. a carnuba and beeswax blend mixed with Alcohol that I mix up.


That's all fine and well but the wax still solidifies when the alcohol host dissipates...but even so...none of that either way discounts the fact that there is at-the-shot...

*"VISUAL PARTICULATE"*

that anyone carefully reviewing the very video you posted can clearly see in motion between 2:07 and 2:09 in your vid.

The one saving grace here is this...your arrow is leaving the bow in an extreme weak spine condition and very nock high.

You gave the weight...but may I ask the spine and how long that arrow is in your OP video?


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Nick, 139 gram limb is very, very light, may be lighter than Borders Hex-7, but that doesn't tell the whole story, the weight of limb tip counts mostly. How short are the limbs? or bow length? 

If you send the bow to Steve (aka Hank) he can put this all to rest or in a better light. Your a good guy. We just want to have more precision measurements. 

As I showed anyone can shoot thru a chrono. I post two above.
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy




----------



## ghostgoblin22

i thought you said it was a 390 grain arrow in the first arrow? in the second you said 325?


----------



## JINKSTER

ghostgoblin22 said:


> i thought you said it was a 390 grain arrow in the first arrow? in the second you said 325?


What's blowing me away is these speeds are being achieved with a 26" arrow?...drawn too what?

The other thing that's blowing me away is here he has a 246fps Darton but claims he's been shooting his Black Swan with the older generation limbs that clock 200fps?

Sump'in ain't right.


----------



## GEREP

What tells me that there might be something up with the chronograph is that the 30 year old Darton is showing 248 fps with 7gpp at 26".

Not likely.

KPC


----------



## Stone Bridge

Harperman said:


> There has never been a recurve that will shoot even close to 340 f.p.s. @ I.B.O specs, in a scientific test....NEVER....Most of today's compound bows that claim 340 I.B.O. speeds dont shoot 340 f.ps...The bowyer is a known shyster in the Archery world, this kinda mess just shows that some folks make a living, and reputation of greatness by preying on the uninformed...Jim


Bingo. Have followed Black Swan claims for years. Always laughable and nobody of note uses their bows in competition.


----------



## ghostgoblin22

yeah put in a 30'' @ 400 grains and we can talk, this test doesnt prove much


----------



## ghostgoblin22

ya first video he claimed he was using a 390 grain arrow and the second is 325.....somethings fishy


----------



## JINKSTER

ghostgoblin22 said:


> yeah put in a 30'' @ 400 grains and we can talk, this test doesnt prove much


Oh contraire!...i wasn't going to say anything but?...the test proved to me that the black swan picked up about 3fps by getting rid of the twisted lips nock and going back to a standard straight slotted nock....man...that didn't work out now did it? :laugh:


----------



## ghostgoblin22

ive chronoed over 30 recurves and longbows with 5gpi to 12gpi, and poundages ranging from 40-65# and never got numbers like that, that chronograph is off 100% guarantee it


----------



## JINKSTER

ghostgoblin22 said:


> ive chronoed over 30 recurves and longbows with 5gpi to 12gpi, and poundages ranging from 40-65# and never got numbers like that, that chronograph is off 100% guarantee it


It's a good thing I'm not a detective...I can't even find that make/brand chrono on the net..google. yahoo, bing.....nothing...nowhere.

Maybe he's coming out with a new line of chrono's? :laugh:


----------



## ghostgoblin22

JINKSTER said:


> It's a good thing I'm not a detective...I can't even find that make/brand chrono on the net..google. yahoo, bing.....nothing...nowhere.
> 
> Maybe he's coming out with a new line of chrono's? :laugh:


its easy to alter a chrono, bow companies do it all the time, plus they are very sensitive and any awkward or wrong positioning can throw numbers way off


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


>


325gr @ 253fps is around 46ke.

If the bow is 90% efficient which would be exceptional for 325gr (8gpp) arrows, it would need to store about 51ke in the limbs. That's 1.24ft-lbs/lbdf, which in compound bow territory...but that would explain the compound bow territory velocities.

Still- The draw force curve will tell the tale. It'd need a mean hump in the early part of the draw.

What is also crazy is if you are doing this (I assume) at a 26" draw length? What's the brace height?

BM


----------



## Aronnax

Border CH DFC - http://peteward.com/2014 reviews/Test CovertHunter.html (scroll down a bit)

Basically, the whole curve is a "mean hump". Stores poop loads of energy early in the draw cycle. This (Black Swan) would need to be even more radical than that (Border).

And also just for those who may not notice, Pete Ward does his tests "hunting ready", shot from fingers with a glove, and with beaver balls installed. Can't compare his data to data collected on a shooting machine.

BM


----------



## turbonockguy

ghostgoblin22 said:


> ya first video he claimed he was using a 390 grain arrow and the second is 325.....somethings fishy[/QUOTin
> 
> in the first vid I used a 28 inch draw and a 390 gr arrow in the second video I used a different arrow. a 26 inch 325 grain. Nothing sneaky I even stated .


----------



## turbonockguy

ghostgoblin22 said:


> its easy to alter a chrono, bow companies do it all the time, plus they are very sensitive and any awkward or wrong positioning can throw numbers way off


I do not know how to alter the chrono. I have no reason to. I did this test for myself and found the data worth sharing. As I stated when it gets warm enough to go outside I will re shoot in direct sunlight. also I do not think that flying wax particles would give the consistant speeds within one or two fps in the repeat shots I did.


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> It's a good thing I'm not a detective...I can't even find that make/brand chrono on the net..google. yahoo, bing.....nothing...nowhere.
> 
> Maybe he's coming out with a new line of chrono's? :laugh:


It is around 10 years old. I still keep it in the box It came in. the company is Chron Tech LTD end of box has MADE IN CANADA


----------



## voodoofire1

Fellas.... Remember the B.S. Impala? It was a remarkable piece of engineering too.


----------



## Rick Barbee

Are Nicks tests accurate? No idea.
I hope he keeps at it & gives us some good data comparisons.

One thing I do know - the blood lust is alive & well here. 
Always someone looking for a way to cut someone up & draw blood.
Once the blood is drawn the piling on begins, because the second, third, forth, etc, etc bites always taste best. Right?

Would that be called gang, or pack mentality?

Rick


----------



## BarneySlayer

I think Rick has a point.

I am skeptical. Given the claims on the website, and the complete lack of credible verification, I'm inclined to doubt. I'm open to somebody showing otherwise, but I'd prefer a reference that is both known and credible.

As has been pointed out, numbers seem a bit unlikely.

I'd love to see what pans out when somebody like Blacky, Pete, or Hank/Steve runs tests under controlled circumstances. If the product does what it claims, and it got verified by any or all three, sales would take off.

Claims on a website, or a friend, even an earnest one, not so much.

All of that being said, we can still be nice.


----------



## Stone Bridge

I'm not inclined to doubt; I'm programmed to doubt. 

These speed claims are so out of line only a gullible sort would give them any credence. Remember OSB and his brother with the new arrow shaft capable of 250fps speeds out of normal bow weights? Guy swore up and down he was on to something. New company making wonder arrows. OSB came online and made a fool of himself once his chrono was fixed or set up correctly. All of us with six working brain cells knew he was wrong all along. 

But OSB had his supporters. The ones wanting to appear noble and understanding and kind.

To hell with kind. This whole bow speed nonsense is just that - nonsense. In time we will discover these bows on the market and none will ever live up to these online claims once a decent chrono and competent operator gets his time.

Guaranteed. Seen this many times before.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

I honestly think if the guy is wrong it is more a case of error then mal intent.


----------



## Stone Bridge

Tradbow Guy said:


> I honestly think if the guy is wrong it is more a case of error then mal intent.


Agreed. But you have to understand, if you are in the archery business, what is "doable" and what is not. 

I wish Sid from Border Bows would comment on this thread if he sees this. Probably will not touch it. Don't blame him. His bows are the fastest practical and I don't think anyone on earth has more real world experience with carbon products than Border does.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Stone Bridge said:


> Agreed. But you have to understand, if you are in the archery business, what is "doable" and what is not.
> 
> I wish Sid from Border Bows would comment on this thread if he sees this. Probably will not touch it. Don't blame him. His bows are the fastest practical and I don't think anyone on earth has more real world experience with carbon products than Border does.


I would have no clue I know this is important to a lot of people but i've never chrono'd an arrow in my life or worried about my bows speed. If not for all the uproar in this thread I probably would have believed it. Perhaps I was lucky to have a long DL so I never had to worry about such things. I've always preferred heavy arrows over speed.


----------



## stoutstuff

Well said Rick. 
I'm glad there are some seeking the "edge of the world". 
Outside verification would certainly help their cause. 
I doubt the outcome would stop them from thinking and trying something else.


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> I think Rick has a point.
> 
> I am skeptical. Given the claims on the website, and the complete lack of credible verification, I'm inclined to doubt. I'm open to somebody showing otherwise, but I'd prefer a reference that is both known and credible.
> 
> As has been pointed out, numbers seem a bit unlikely.
> 
> I'd love to see what pans out when somebody like Blacky, Pete, or Hank/Steve runs tests under controlled circumstances. If the product does what it claims, and it got verified by any or all three, sales would take off.
> 
> Claims on a website, or a friend, even an earnest one, not so much.
> 
> All of that being said, we can still be nice.


If you looked at the end of the video I stated I will send the bow to any of the folks you mentioned above.
If they have better equipment. I am all for it! All they have to do is contact me with an address.

I am going to do another test today using the original Black Swan limbs and compare to the new ones.
I will post it whatever the results. and you can all argue some more.

What I find strange is that my old chrono produced consistent results on the last video with multiple shots. and somehow I guess some of you figured i cheated, or modified the chrono. or perhaps the device is just wrong all the time?
What ever you choose to believe is fine. I have friends who are republican and friends who are democrats. they see the same data and choose to believe in different truths?
So are there any takers on my offer? 
or is it more fun to think what the real answer may be?


----------



## turbonockguy

Some have asked the brace height of the Black Swan. It is 7.25 inch from the belly.

Someone stated they prefer heavier arrows and ane not concerned about speed.

I prefer heavier hunting arrows myself. but it would seem to make sense If i can shoot them with a more efficient bow. and get them to fly a little faster. I would get flatter trajectory and also better penetration?

When I practiced the martial arts. I found it much easier and much much less painful to break a brick by hitting it really fast! I also found that by hitting an opponent really fast seemed to cause them more pain then when I hit slow.
There must be some law of physics at play in those observations? I think they also apply to archery?


----------



## MrSinister

That should do it. the verification has been offered. Just let someone else get the same numbers. Also if you have a known commodity such as a compound or something you could test your equipment with to show it is working properly that should also do it. I also doubt if the results are correct but I also thought the PSE X force would be impossible to shoot back before I shot one and was so wrong so I gave up on speculation about items.


----------



## GEREP

Stone Bridge said:


> I wish Sid from Border Bows would comment on this thread if he sees this. Probably will not touch it. Don't blame him. His bows are the fastest practical...


How would anyone know that? 

Not unlike the situation in this thread, he makes grandiose claims, but leaves the testing (proof) up to garage testers using equipment that may or may not be accurate, testing parameters that may or may not be consistent, or just flat out opinion.

The only actual independent tester that I know of that has run a Covert Hunter (Hex 7 limbs) through the paces is Pete Ward (whom I very much respect by the way, but even he would tell you that his testing is not as precise as it could be) . 

Including the Covert Hunter, he has tested at least three bows that are all within a rounding error of each other, at very close to the same testing parameters, and two of them are 5+ year old designs, one of them being a longbow.

Covert Hunter / 9.8 gpp / 28" draw / 188 fps

ACS-CX / 9.8 gpp / 28" / 188 fps

TT Titan Extreme BF limbs / 9.4 gpp / 188 fps 

Point being, unless all testing parameters are *exactly* the same, the claims are pretty useless...if not outright misleading. 

An inch in brace height here, a smaller diameter sting there, type of or lack of string silencers, and even where one measures draw length to can *EASILY* account for 10 fps, not even taking into consideration the position and calibration of the chronograph, finger -vs- mechanical release, and a host of other factors. 

KPC


----------



## FLINTHEAD

Not to say that speed is not a factor in 3-d. Ignoring the claims of the chronograph--- the fact that no one has seen these bows in competition is enough info for me. Used to reload .243 bullets for the range and had some loaded so hot ,I believe, the spin and friction caused the inside of the bullet to become molten. Hit a piece of broomstraw and the lightweight bullet sprayed the target with many little holes. Now that was a very fast bullet but could not get a good group with it. Except for defence it was useless. Sorry if this is out of line for this thread. Just one opinion. Roy


----------



## turbonockguy

FLINTHEAD said:


> Not to say that speed is not a factor in 3-d. Ignoring the claims of the chronograph--- the fact that no one has seen these bows in competition is enough info for me. Used to reload .243 bullets for the range and had some loaded so hot ,I believe, the spin and friction caused the inside of the bullet to become molten. Hit a piece of broomstraw and the lightweight bullet sprayed the target with many little holes. Now that was a very fast bullet but could not get a good group with it. Except for defence it was useless. Sorry if this is out of line for this thread. Just one opinion. Roy


I grew up in a gun shop-archery shop. we once loaded some 300 savages with a hot load and 90 grain bullets. Helter Skelter happened. my uncle wanted them for turkeys. they would basically blow up a patch of grass.
I do not think arrows would have that problem. Nothing I have shot has become molten. My turbonocks will generate up to 7000 rpm depending on you bow speed. and they work just fine. Randy Oitker on the Impossible shots show on the Outdoor Channel has done some pretty amazing things with my nocks on his arrows. Bareshaft! even!


----------



## stoutstuff

Nick, I just sent a message to Hank/Steve to check this thread. Maybe he will want to test?


----------



## Stone Bridge

GEREP, I'm no Border fan. I don't like their limbs. But I have tested tons of limbs including Hex 6 Borders limbs and they were the fastest by a good margin. Many other shooters on this forum, especially in the FITA section, have timed Border limbs. In almost every case the Borders come out on top for speed. They are not well known in the TRAD section but within the competition world of archery Border limbs have a very good following for several reasons - speed being one of the top attributes. Border limbs are all very fast. Nobody who has ever done much testing of limbs would contest that.

I don't like the feel of Border limbs and would not own a set. But they sure are cutting-edge in construction and very, very quick. A person could do worse than to shoot Border.

As an aside: I have never seen a Black Swan recurve at any archery competition in my life. I would notice their distinctive risers. I notice equipment when at events. No Swans in sight. I wonder why?


----------



## MrSinister

I think the key isn't if or if not in terms of speed but the fact that as it was said no one has any standards for testing or putting out data on the equipment. that has bugged me for a long while also. I mean sure compound makers cheat the numbers but for the most part the posted numbers give you a good idea of how the equipment performs. In trad all we get is man they hit hard or fly like darts or what ever. It would be great to have a standard for testing and listing performance but I think like was posted earlier it would just end the sales of high dollar limbs once it was shown they didn't have anything much to offer in the long run.


----------



## JParanee

GEREP said:


> How would anyone know that?
> 
> Not unlike the situation in this thread, he makes grandiose claims, but leaves the testing (proof) up to garage testers using equipment that may or may not be accurate, testing parameters that may or may not be consistent, or just flat out opinion.
> 
> The only actual independent tester that I know of that has run a Covert Hunter (Hex 7 limbs) through the paces is Pete Ward (whom I very much respect by the way, but even he would tell you that his testing is not as precise as it could be) .
> 
> Including the Covert Hunter, he has tested at least three bows that are all within a rounding error of each other, at very close to the same testing parameters, and two of them are 5+ year old designs, one of them being a longbow.
> 
> Covert Hunter / 9.8 gpp / 28" draw / 188 fps
> 
> ACS-CX / 9.8 gpp / 28" / 188 fps
> 
> TT Titan Extreme BF limbs / 9.4 gpp / 188 fps
> 
> Point being, unless all testing parameters are *exactly* the same, the claims are pretty useless...if not outright misleading.
> 
> An inch in brace height here, a smaller diameter sting there, type of or lack of string silencers, and even where one measures draw length to can *EASILY* account for 10 fps, not even taking into consideration the position and calibration of the chronograph, finger -vs- mechanical release, and a host of other factors.
> 
> KPC


Geez Kevin 

Even on a non border thread Ya have to take a shot at Sid 

Pretty weak


----------



## Rick Barbee

MrSinister said:


> I think the key isn't if or if not in terms of speed but the fact that as it was said no one has any standards for testing or putting out data on the equipment. that has bugged me for a long while also. I mean sure compound makers cheat the numbers but for the most part the posted numbers give you a good idea of how the equipment performs. In trad all we get is man they hit hard or fly like darts or what ever. It would be great to have a standard for testing and listing performance but I think like was posted earlier it would just end the sales of high dollar limbs once it was shown they didn't have anything much to offer in the long run.


I completely agree with this.

My suggestion for testing would be:

(1) Bow drawn to 28"

(2) Arrow weight at 10gpp

Those two as a standard, but there are some other things that could be added, such as 

(3) the arrows having a specific FOC like 15%

(4) all arrows the same length like 29"

Rick


----------



## JINKSTER

Rick Barbee said:


> Are Nicks tests accurate? No idea.
> I hope he keeps at it & gives us some good data comparisons.
> 
> One thing I do know - the blood lust is alive & well here.
> Always someone looking for a way to cut someone up & draw blood.
> Once the blood is drawn the piling on begins, because the second, third, forth, etc, etc bites always taste best. Right?
> 
> Would that be called gang, or pack mentality?
> 
> Rick





BarneySlayer said:


> I think Rick has a point.





Tradbow Guy said:


> I honestly think if the guy is wrong it is more a case of error then mal intent.





stoutstuff said:


> Well said Rick.
> I'm glad there are some seeking the "edge of the world".


Well thanks a lot folks...and congratulations...it's official...I'm ashamed of myself. 

I fell into it as well...big time....thank you for pointing out yet another of my many character defects that often times become shortcomings. :thumbs_up

"this"...being one of those times.

But it went like this for me...I'm still skeptical of turbonocks....so imagine how skeptical I was when the cat that I'm skeptical of indicated that even he himself was skeptical of his own results citing it as...."Totally Unbelievable".

In which case?...I guess I just agreed with him....whole heartedly....and then some...my bad...sorry.

But man?...especially the Darton Valient at 246?


----------



## MrSinister

Rick Barbee said:


> I completely agree with this.
> 
> My suggestion for testing would be:
> 
> (1) Bow drawn to 28"
> 
> (2) Arrow weight at 10gpp
> 
> Those two as a standard, but there are some other things that could be added, such as
> 
> (3) the arrows having a specific FOC like 15%
> 
> (4) all arrows the same length like 29"
> 
> Rick


dead on but I don't think we should hold our breath waiting on it to happen.


----------



## ghostgoblin22

Rick Barbee said:


> I completely agree with this.
> 
> My suggestion for testing would be:
> 
> (1) Bow drawn to 28"
> 
> (2) Arrow weight at 10gpp
> 
> Those two as a standard, but there are some other things that could be added, such as
> 
> (3) the arrows having a specific FOC like 15%
> 
> (4) all arrows the same length like 29"
> 
> Rick


thats what ive asked him to do this whole thread he keeps ignoring my request


----------



## stoutstuff

Jinkster, I like that you are one that poses questions and digs for information. Keep it up!

I really don't care how these new limbs test out - although I am interested in how they do, if that makes sense.
What is important, is a Black Swan bow is an idea brought to life by someone with a life-long history in archery. It is designed to be a high tech hunting bow. The Turbonock is a new "spin" (sorry) on nocks and Nicks idea brought to life.
Neither product is the end all design and defiantly not for everyone.


----------



## Stone Bridge

FOC has no bearing on an arrow's speed at 3 feet out of the bow when shot through chrono screens. Only total weight has any influence. Not even arrow diameter.

Not even fletching has much measurable effect at chrono distance either. It does down range, but not at 3 to 6 feet. I've shot bareshafts against 4" feathered shafts (same shaft) and could measure no difference at such close range in FPS. And the feathered shafts weighted 5-6 grains more. No difference you could measure.


----------



## Rick Barbee

Stone Bridge said:


> FOC has no bearing on an arrow's speed at 3 feet out of the bow when shot through chrono screens. Only total weight has any influence. Not even arrow diameter.
> 
> Not even fletching has much measurable effect at chrono distance either. It does down range, but not at 3 to 6 feet. I've shot bareshafts against 4" feathered shafts (same shaft) and could measure no difference at such close range in FPS. And the feathered shafts weighted 5-6 grains more. No difference you could measure.


I agree, BUT the fewer the variables, the less chance there will be of someone crying foul.

Rick


----------



## Stone Bridge

Rick Barbee said:


> I agree, BUT the fewer the variables, the less chance there will be of someone crying foul.
> 
> Rick


This is true. Not a bad idea on your part.


----------



## JINKSTER

I still don't understand how anyone gets the numbers the OP posted here especially when the arrow is going across through the beams with the nock about 6" high and waaaay wide...lots of lost energy and speed there.


----------



## turbonockguy

stoutstuff said:


> Jinkster, I like that you are one that poses questions and digs for information. Keep it up!
> 
> I really don't care how these new limbs test out - although I am interested in how they do, if that makes sense.
> What is important, is a Black Swan bow is an idea brought to life by someone with a life-long history in archery. It is designed to be a high tech hunting bow. The Turbonock is a new "spin" (sorry) on nocks and Nicks idea brought to life.
> Neither product is the end all design and defiantly not for everyone.


you are correct! 
Yet when new ideas are brought up here, you almost have to wear a flack jacket. 
I do not get upset with the skepitcisim . It is just over the past 12 years I keep hearing the same thing over and over.. After all the work to get a small niche in the compound community, I never even considered trying to get the Trad shooters interested. 

I grew up in a gun shop ,archery shop. I have been shooting trad since age 3. I competed in tournaments back then most archers were "instinctive" shooters.
Howard Hill was my Hero ,along with my dad, and I actually got to shoot with Howard when I was 11 yrs old. 

When Sights appeared on recurves they were greatly frowned upon and I believe had only one class at tournaments. My dad would often say that sights would ruin the sport. He was quite stubborn on this. and would not make arrows for sight shooters. HMMMMM ? was he right or wrong?
I remember when compounds came out I think they were banned from competition for 3 years??

If I remember correctly about two years ago one of Arvids Black Swan shooters tried my nocks and liked them , his name is Robert Wood, He won the Arkansas state championship .and shooter of the year. other Black Swan shooters as well as just random orders from trad shooters started coming in. Since I started sponsoring AT the nock sales in both markets has shown a steady growth.
To me that means that most who had open minds enough to fight through their skepticism and actually try my products have been satisfied.

Jinkster who is an avowed skeptic, called me out for stating that even I did not believe the results of the chrono test. I think anyone who watches that video and has jommon sense would understand. my comment. I saw numbers that I did not expect to see and exclaimed I do not believe it. yet after repeating the shot and the same numbers came up . I chose to believe. (looks like the weather is warming up so sunday I will shoot the chrono outside and see if changing the light source makes a difference)
I chose to post the video because I thought others would be interested, I also knew that this would also be food for the skeptic club to digest.

I have used that chrono for years no problems except in incandescent, and fluorescent light, which I did not use. I used halogen.
So today i will try to get the original black swan limbs chronographed ( someone requested that) and I will tomorrow shoot outdoors with fingers ( someone I think will only accept outdoor finger shooting through the chrono) . 

I enjoy shooting that bow so it is no big deal. 

I have made an offer to lend my bow to the testers mentioned by several on this string. No responses yet????


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> I still don't understand how anyone gets the numbers the OP posted here especially when the arrow is going across through the beams with the nock about 6" high and waaaay wide...lots of lost energy and speed there.


I am pretty sure on that shot I may have put the nock on top rather than under the nocking point. But at such close range to the chrono that had little effect on the speed. as other repeat shots proved out. also if you would like to try some of the string lube I make I will send you some. It does not break into flakes. I use some other proprietary materials with it. I do not sell the string lube I make . but it is better than any commercial stuff I have tried.


----------



## JINKSTER

turbonockguy said:


> I am pretty sure on that shot I may have put the nock on top rather than under the nocking point. But at such close range to the chrono that had little effect on the speed. as other repeat shots proved out. also if you would like to try some of the string lube I make I will send you some. It does not break into flakes. I use some other proprietary materials with it. I do not sell the string lube I make . but it is better than any commercial stuff I have tried.


Okay Nick...now we're getting somewhere because if you did nock above the nock point?...that would explain why I saw a lot of up/down movement of the shaft just prior too the shot being released...and I can most definitely understand such a mistake cause Lord knows I make many of them myself....especially when I'm all excited with brand new kit that often times exceed expectation and does...cause let's face it...the trad biz is such a diminutive niche market that if you're not blowing customers away with quality, performance or both?...you'll be out of business soon as there's no room for lackluster in anything "trad" biz related...whoops!...gotta go!...Just signed for my new Morrison 21" XD Riser! YEAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!


----------



## GEREP

JParanee said:


> Geez Kevin
> 
> Even on a non border thread Ya have to take a shot at Sid
> 
> Pretty weak


How is that a "shot" JP? 

I didn't bring up Sid, another poster did, and it was in the realm of testing, and his bows being the fastest. 

I simply said there is no way of knowing that unless uniform testing parameters are used, and in the only case where somewhat uniform testing was used (Pete Ward), the results were within a rounding error of each other on a number of different bows. Are we to assume that Pete Ward was taking a shot at Sid too? If posting an independent tester's results is taking a shot at someone, I'm just not sure what to say.

It's kind of interesting that it is almost unanimous by the posters here that something with the OP's testing/methods/outcome with his Black Swan limbs must be amiss. Even you said *"I would never say someone was knowingly making false claims but something is not right." * 

Most everyone here called for and independent tester using uniform parameters. Were they all taking a shot at him?

Sid's bows might very well be the fastest on the planet. If they are, good for him and good for him for pushing the envelope. I just can't for the life of me figure out why he doesn't submit them to an independent tester, any independent tester, so the traditional archery community can see exactly how they stack up under controlled, consistent parameters. 

Wouldn't you think it would be in the best interest of any bowyer that stakes their reputation on pushing the boundaries of performance, whether it be Black Swan, Border, A&H, or anyone else, to do so? 

KPC


----------



## GEREP

Stone Bridge said:


> GEREP, I'm no Border fan. I don't like their limbs. But I have tested tons of limbs including Hex 6 Borders limbs and they were the fastest by a good margin. Many other shooters on this forum, especially in the FITA section, have timed Border limbs. In almost every case the Borders come out on top for speed. They are not well known in the TRAD section but within the competition world of archery Border limbs have a very good following for several reasons - speed being one of the top attributes. Border limbs are all very fast. Nobody who has ever done much testing of limbs would contest that.


I agree with you SB. I have never shot the Hex 7s but I have shot the 5's and 6's. They were *very* nice, excellent craftsmanship, and they have a very unique feel later in the draw. Like you, I'm not a fan of the way they feel. I'm sure I could get used to them, but for me it never felt like I could reach a firm anchor. It just felt "mushy" to me. Some people like that feeling, some don't.

I've never suggested that Border limbs aren't fast. *They most certainly are fast.* The question I've always had, and still have, is *how fast, compared to other fast limbs, using the same exact testing parameters.* When Pete Ward did that, (at least as close as he could) there just wasn't any earth shattering difference, and in a few cases, no difference at all.

I can assure you that I can get my bow to shoot 230 fps, but what does it mean? Without knowing how I arrived at it, or how it compares to anything else using the same methods, it is just useless information.

That's all I've ever said and ever asked for. Why people get so sensitive about that is beyond me.  

KPC


----------



## celtpaddy

Seems like everyone's working a angle. Pretty entertaining though being a consumer.


----------



## SAVIOUR68

This has been blown way out of norm as typical Archery talk does, this place is starting to look like the Leatherwall


----------



## JParanee

GEREP said:


> How is that a "shot" JP?
> 
> I didn't bring up Sid, another poster did, and it was in the realm of testing, and his bows being the fastest.
> 
> I simply said there is no way of knowing that unless uniform testing parameters are used, and in the only case where somewhat uniform testing was used (Pete Ward), the results were within a rounding error of each other on a number of different bows. Are we to assume that Pete Ward was taking a shot at Sid too? If posting an independent tester's results is taking a shot at someone, I'm just not sure what to say.
> 
> It's kind of interesting that it is almost unanimous by the posters here that something with the OP's testing/methods/outcome with his Black Swan limbs must be amiss. Even you said *"I would never say someone was knowingly making false claims but something is not right." *
> 
> Most everyone here called for and independent tester using uniform parameters. Were they all taking a shot at him?
> 
> Sid's bows might very well be the fastest on the planet. If they are, good for him and good for him for pushing the envelope. I just can't for the life of me figure out why he doesn't submit them to an independent tester, any independent tester, so the traditional archery community can see exactly how they stack up under controlled, consistent parameters.
> 
> Wouldn't you think it would be in the best interest of any bowyer that stakes their reputation on pushing the boundaries of performance, whether it be Black Swan, Border, A&H, or anyone else, to do so?
> 
> KPC


Naaa 

Why bother 

People will just form alias's and attack any thread they can on the subject  

As for the OP's thread 

Any claim of 8.5 GPP over 250 FPS is pretty unrealistic and in the end I am sure we will see that there was some readings that were off 

I'm sure like I said earlier there was no bad intentions just something with the lighting 

I never inferred anything negative about the OP or Arvid's bows 

I have seen and shot a few of his bows and I only have positive things to say about them 

I'll be honest here I'm just sick of you pissing all over Border 

Like I said 

Weak


----------



## GEREP

Look JP, I respect you and your posts.

If I've posted something inaccurate, let me know and we can discuss it. 

I'll be honest too. I'm sick of people "pissing" on anyone who asks legitimate questions, or has opinions that don't happen to match someone else's. I've been watching it happen for the decade and a half I've been on these boards. In that time, seen at least 4 new bows come on the scene that were the absolute best thing since sliced bread, and anyone who didn't agree, or asked for verification, was an idiot, a hater, or a shill.

That's what I think is weak.

KPC


----------



## newell38

I'll give someone 500$ for their used darton! I shoot a 2013 bs hybrid and I did get very good chrono readings and it's my go to bow (and my acs same specs)..but it was well below the op numbers. Chrono numbers are off...honest mistake.


----------



## JParanee

GEREP said:


> Look JP, I respect you and your posts.
> 
> If I've posted something inaccurate, let me know and we can discuss it.
> 
> I'll be honest too. I'm sick of people "pissing" on anyone who asks legitimate questions, or has opinions that don't happen to match someone else's. I've been watching it happen for the decade and a half I've been on these boards. In that time, seen at least 4 new bows come on the scene that were the absolute best thing since sliced bread, and anyone who didn't agree, or asked for verification, was an idiot, a hater, or a shill.
> 
> That's what I think is weak.
> 
> KPC


Kevin if Ya did respect me you would not have used an alias and trashed all my Border threads on the other forum  

I should not have brought it up 

My mistake 

I just found it odd on a Black Swan thread to take a shot at Border 

No worries 

Sorry to take the thread off topic folks


----------



## turbonockguy

newell38 said:


> I'll give someone 500$ for their used darton! I shoot a 2013 bs hybrid and I did get very good chrono readings and it's my go to bow (and my acs same specs)..but it was well below the op numbers. Chrono numbers are off...honest mistake.


Is 500$ the same as $500? If so you can have mine after I do the chrono shots tomorrow.
It is a valiant.


----------



## turbonockguy

Rick Barbee said:


> I completely agree with this.
> 
> My suggestion for testing would be:
> 
> (1) Bow drawn to 28"
> 
> (2) Arrow weight at 10gpp
> 
> Those two as a standard, but there are some other things that could be added, such as
> 
> (3) the arrows having a specific FOC like 15%
> 
> (4) all arrows the same length like 29"
> 
> Rick[/QUOTE
> 
> OK Rick !!!!!!!1
> 
> 
> I have a CARBON EXPRESS TERMINATOR HUNTER 6075.
> 
> It has blazers on the back and I found a Saunders tip that gets it to 460 grains. Arrow is just shy of 29 inches.
> I will use this with the Black Swan tomorrow at 28 inches .The Black Swan is 46 lbs at 28 inches.
> Hopefully this will give you numbers you will be happy with this?


----------



## Fury90flier

It appears that the chrono is too close to the bow from what I can see. It needs to be past the point of where the arrow leaves the string. It seems that if the bow was at brace, the arrow would be into the first screen. From tests I've done, this will give you inflated numbers.

On my Hoyt Vantage Pro, set at 55# with a 29.5" DL flinging a 460grn arrow, I was getting 298fps...way high. That was with the chrono at a distance similar to turbo. However when I put the chrono about 36"-48", I get a more realistic speed of around 260ish.


----------



## Str8 Shooter

Don't forget if you test it at 28" to use the AMO standard for measuring. It's the measurement to the deepest part of the grip + 1 3/4"... so for a 28" draw you'd mark the arrow at 26 1/4" and pull that directly to the spot above the throat of the grip. This usually is the same spot the plunger is installed. 

In the first video he said he pulled the tip to the plunger and later stated it was a 28" arrow. If that's the case he was really testing it at a 29 3/4" draw and the poundage would've been higher than stated. 

If you want people to believe numbers video the arrow being weighed, draw weight, arrow marked at 26 1/4" (for 28" AMO), and the arrow pulled to the exact spot and that will go a ways towards dispelling doubt.


----------



## Beendare

I wish Arvin well but would caution anyone wanting to run out and get one of these to let the new car smell wear off a little. My buddy has a new Black Swan with a cracked limb in his garage that was the latest and greatest some 10 years ago...Arvin was going to give him a replacement when he got the whole carbon thing worked out...maybe now its time. If you search, there were many problems with these bows limbs breaking years ago. I hope he has it worked out....the bows are fast and do look nice with great fit and finish.


----------



## stoutstuff

My experience with the last two generations of Black Swan limbs is they are pretty tough. Many bowyers went through a learning process with carbon fiber back in the day.


----------



## BarneySlayer

I would think that hank, or blacky, or pete would be a better reference, but I would be happy to play with it, best I can, and see what happens. And if somebody doesn't like my results, can always say they're wrong.

I happen to have a 46# covert hunter, and draw to about 28.5"...

My chintow scale is a bit crappy, but I think we could get ball park plausibility.

I should say, while it felt a little soft at first, I've come to love a 'mushy' draw, so that might be a bias . Still, I would never say that border makes the best bows or limbs. Ultimately, priority and preference.


----------



## Stone Bridge

Barney, that mushy feel at full draw is actually very nice when it comes to consistent arrow speed at inconsistent draw length or creeping. Border limbs having so much early energy storage are very forgiving of technique in that respect. As you no doubt know, they feel mushy because within their draw range there is very little stack. 

I happen to like more resistance as I near full draw. It's a feel thing. The only reason I don't shoot Border limbs. Other than that I think they are tops in every other way.


----------



## stoutstuff

Don't you wish there were more "try before you buy" from the top end bowyers? 
If I win the lottery, maybe I'll start a limb rental service?


----------



## turbonockguy

Str8 Shooter said:


> Don't forget if you test it at 28" to use the AMO standard for measuring. It's the measurement to the deepest part of the grip + 1 3/4"... so for a 28" draw you'd mark the arrow at 26 1/4" and pull that directly to the spot above the throat of the grip. This usually is the same spot the plunger is installed.
> 
> In the first video he said he pulled the tip to the plunger and later stated it was a 28" arrow. If that's the case he was really testing it at a 29 3/4" draw and the poundage would've been higher than stated.
> 
> If you want people to believe numbers video the arrow being weighed, draw weight, arrow marked at 26 1/4" (for 28" AMO), and the arrow pulled to the exact spot and that will go a ways towards dispelling doubt.


Thank you !!!! I will do that. (archers helping archers!!)


----------



## turbonockguy

I just got an E-mail from Arvid Danielson . He is going to do a video today. In sunlight. in Tucson. Arvid is an engineer and way better than me in doing testing.
So as soon as it is done He has given me permission to post it. 
I am still going to do my testing indoors to see how close our data is. Obviously I am tha amature when it comes to this.
The nice thing is that there are some folks in our sport that are willing to help others.


----------



## Rick Barbee

turbonockguy said:


> I just got an E-mail from Arvid Danielson . He is going to do a video today. In sunlight. in Tucson. Arvid is an engineer and way better than me in doing testing.
> So as soon as it is done He has given me permission to post it.
> I am still going to do my testing indoors to see how close our data is. Obviously I am tha amature when it comes to this.
> The nice thing is that there are some folks in our sport that are willing to help others.


Looking forward to that Nick.
I still want to see you do a comparison between your old limbs & new ones.
I'm not really concerned with the numbers other than to see the difference between the limbs.

You got work to do, so go get busy. 

Rick


----------



## GEREP

turbonockguy said:


> The nice thing is that there are some folks in our sport that are willing to help others.


I couldn't agree more Nick, but I hope you at least try to understand something.

Some of the people that are pointing out or questioning certain findings, inconsistencies, potentially faulty testing methods, grandiose claims, etc., actually *ARE* trying to help other archers.

Many of us have nothing to gain by doing so, we aren't in the archery business, and we stand to gain nothing, or lose nothing if your Black Swan actually does shoot an arrow at 250 fps. It would be *awesome* of it does. 

However, there is nothing more frustrating than for a person to lay out a significant amount of money, sometimes money they have saved for years, or by sacrificing other things, to purchase something they expect to be one way and have it not live up to the hype, the claims, or what they have been led to believe.

It's one thing for a person to lay out 80.00 or 100.00 for a set of limbs and find them to be lacking, but to lay out 800.00 or 1000.00 for something that was supposed to but doesn't revolutionize their shooting is a little different.

Whether it seems like it or not, some of us actually *ARE* trying to help, even if it's just to help manage unrealistic expectations. We could all probably try to do it in a more respectful manner (including myself), but at the end of the day, advancements are made by those who question something. 

After all, science is more about disproving a hypothesis than proving one. The guy who questions a theory is seldom liked by the one who advances one, but both are absolutely necessary.

:wink:

KPC


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter

GEREP said:


> I couldn't agree more Nick, but I hope you at least try to understand something.
> 
> Some of the people that are pointing out or questioning certain findings, inconsistencies, potentially faulty testing methods, grandiose claims, etc., actually *ARE* trying to help other archers.
> 
> Many of us have nothing to gain by doing so, we aren't in the archery business, and we stand to gain nothing, or lose nothing if your Black Swan actually does shoot an arrow at 250 fps. It would be *awesome* of it does.
> 
> However, there is nothing more frustrating than for a person to lay out a significant amount of money, sometimes money they have saved for years, or by sacrificing other things, to purchase something they expect to be one way and have it not live up to the hype, the claims, or what they have been led to believe.
> 
> It's one thing for a person to lay out 80.00 or 100.00 for a set of limbs and find them to be lacking, but to lay out 800.00 or 1000.00 for something that was supposed to but doesn't revolutionize their shooting is a little different.
> 
> Whether it seems like it or not, some of us actually *ARE* trying to help, even if it's just to help manage unrealistic expectations. We could all probably try to do it in a more respectful manner (including myself), but at the end of the day, advancements are made by those who question something.
> 
> After all, science is more about disproving a hypothesis than proving one. The guy who questions a theory is seldom liked by the one who advances one, but both are absolutely necessary.
> 
> :wink:
> 
> KPC


My feelings exactly.


----------



## JParanee

I would not buy any limb that I could not return for a full refund if not satisfied..... it's that simple

If Arvid at BS offers this than there should be no issues 

If someone buys the limbs expecting 250 FPS at a 28 inch draw with 8.5 grains per pound and they don't do it just return them 

If he is not willing to do it than buy somewhere else .... Again that simple


----------



## turbonockguy

GEREP said:


> I couldn't agree more Nick, but I hope you at least try to understand something.
> 
> Some of the people that are pointing out or questioning certain findings, inconsistencies, potentially faulty testing methods, grandiose claims, etc., actually *ARE* trying to help other archers.
> 
> Many of us have nothing to gain by doing so, we aren't in the archery business, and we stand to gain nothing, or lose nothing if your Black Swan actually does shoot an arrow at 250 fps. It would be *awesome* of it does.
> 
> However, there is nothing more frustrating than for a person to lay out a significant amount of money, sometimes money they have saved for years, or by sacrificing other things, to purchase something they expect to be one way and have it not live up to the hype, the claims, or what they have been led to believe.
> 
> It's one thing for a person to lay out 80.00 or 100.00 for a set of limbs and find them to be lacking, but to lay out 800.00 or 1000.00 for something that was supposed to but doesn't revolutionize their shooting is a little different.
> 
> Whether it seems like it or not, some of us actually *ARE* trying to help, even if it's just to help manage unrealistic expectations. We could all probably try to do it in a more respectful manner (including myself), but at the end of the day, advancements are made by those who question something.
> 
> After all, science is more about disproving a hypothesis than proving one. The guy who questions a theory is seldom liked by the one who advances one, but both are absolutely necessary.
> 
> :wink:
> 
> KPC


Thank you!!
Advancements are also made by those who think out of the box.

The main reason the Turbonock exists ( whether you like the turbonock or not) Is that as a kid I did not understand why bullets flew more accurately than arrow without any feathers. My dad was also an aeronautical engineer. and did explain the principles of rifling to me. and drag and wind resistance. 

40 years later I was in a mall near Boston Selling Headsox and I was totally bored. I started spinning a quarter on the cart for something to do. and I was thinking how much more fun it was making arrows as a kid.

You can call it daydreaming but I kind of had a vision where I saw an arrow with a twisted nock flying. and I went DUH!!! why not put rifling on arrows and reduce the wind resistance caused by vanes. I sketched it on a paper bag. When I got home I carved a twisted nock with my jewelry tools out of a nylon rod.
It worked.


----------



## turbonockguy

Whew !! Just got the arrows built. It was a bit of a task getting a 460 grain,a 470 grain and a 530 grain arrow.
Luckily I have a collection of several hundred arrows. I did video the arrow making and the weigh in.
I used my old Lyman Scale which only goes to 500 grains. so I weighed the shaft and the insert and tip separately.
I am also going to shoot my Css and will adjust its poundage to 46 the same as the new limbs on the black swan.


----------



## ranchoarcher

Bottom line is. Can a "recurve" put more energy in the arrow than the force it takes to draw it back. If the answer is no then obviously something is flawed in the testing. BTW, I've had a Hoyt tiburon at 40lbs registering over 1200 fps with 260 grain arrows. Once I even had the imperial at 45lbs using 560 grain arrows clock nearly 300. Chronos sometimes mess up. Bad lighting, other crap in the air, or who knows what can fudge it up.


----------



## grantmac

Stone Bridge said:


> Barney, that mushy feel at full draw is actually very nice when it comes to consistent arrow speed at inconsistent draw length or creeping. Border limbs having so much early energy storage are very forgiving of technique in that respect. As you no doubt know, they feel mushy because within their draw range there is very little stack.
> 
> I happen to like more resistance as I near full draw. It's a feel thing. The only reason I don't shoot Border limbs. Other than that I think they are tops in every other way.


The Hex series is by far the most consistent across the chrono at different stringwalking crawls I've ever seen.

Side note: you ever shot a set of their conventional limbs? Bliss I tell ya.

As for these Black Swan limbs, I'll file them along with perpetual motion and overunity motors: snake oil.

-Grant


----------



## Blacky

:smile: 

that's all I gonna say about this 

and I'm going to get me some popcorn


----------



## JParanee

Blacky said:


> :smile:
> 
> that's all I gonna say about this
> 
> and I'm going to get me some popcorn


Hi buddy 

Glad you could stop in


----------



## Harperman

If anyone is interested, there is a signed Certificate of testing, done by Mr. Norb Mullaney,, on the Black Swan website...The numbers are very good, and I believe that the testing was done to the old A.M.O. Standard (now called A.T.A. Standard) of 30 inches of draw length...The old AMO standard of 9 g.p.p., and 30" of draw length is a pretty good Standard...Norb Mullaney is well respected as being a fair and Scientific bow tester...The late Mr. Emery J.Loiselle (sp?) was another Bow tester of note....Jim


----------



## turbonockguy

turbonockguy said:


> Whew !! Just got the arrows built. It was a bit of a task getting a 460 grain,a 470 grain and a 530 grain arrow.
> Luckily I have a collection of several hundred arrows. I did video the arrow making and the weigh in.
> I used my old Lyman Scale which only goes to 500 grains. so I weighed the shaft and the insert and tip separately.
> I am also going to shoot my Css and will adjust its poundage to 46 the same as the new limbs on the black swan.


OOPS I have to do some re shooting!!
I was getting 46 lbs on the bow scale drawing 28 inches to the end of the arrow. So I made a 460 grain arrow
But when I draw the arrow on the bow scale to the amo mark I get 42 lbs. So I have to make another arrow at 420 grains. that ws a Duh! moment.


----------



## petew

:mg:


----------



## Stone Bridge

Grant, I'm with you on the snake oil. No way that bow shoots 250fpg at 28" and 8.5gpp. No way.

Have followed Black Swan bow speed claims over the years and all fell flat by a wide margin when finally tested by real people. 

I shot a hybrid BS and recurve with metal risers in the Everglades several years ago. Was playing with other guys' bows at a field archery contest. The BS recurve was not as fast as my Winex equipped Hoyt riser and I was only shooting 40# with 305 grain arrows. Shot the Swan with same arrows. Swan was about 45# I remember. Felt stiff and it did not equal the Winex limbs. I was shooting Spin-Wings off the shelf of the BS but I had not problems doing this.

Of course the Swan was not tuned for me but I could tell instantly the speed was only normal for an
everyday bow. Not bad by any means, but not the equal of my lighter Winex limbs. A limb that has been around for 500 year it seems.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau

I have been down with the flu and will take a look at this when I am feeling better. Thought I would see where this went while putting in out of office messages for tomorrow. Back to bed.


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


>


I'm not going to get deep into this because I've done my back and forth about poorly done tests performed by turbonockguy but did anybody else notice that the chronograph seems to be only about 18" in front of the bow? I didn't read the whole thread so I'm not sure if it's been brought up but to use a chronograph, you must be more than 1 full arrows length from the chrono so that the arrow is completely off the bow before the arrow enters the chrono.


----------



## Fury90flier

Not only off the bow but for a recurve it should really be past the first couple of flexes...too much flex can give inconsistent readings.

typical results of being too close.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajlrIgzQCCI


Turbo...set the chrono about 6' from the bow...then show the results.


----------



## BarneySlayer

Stone Bridge said:


> Barney, that mushy feel at full draw is actually very nice when it comes to consistent arrow speed at inconsistent draw length or creeping. Border limbs having so much early energy storage are very forgiving of technique in that respect. As you no doubt know, they feel mushy because within their draw range there is very little stack.
> 
> I happen to like more resistance as I near full draw. It's a feel thing. The only reason I don't shoot Border limbs. Other than that I think they are tops in every other way.


I know what you're talking about. It took me awhile to adjust. When i was used to my more standard recurve. Didn't feel that it in any way felt unsmooth. However, after getting used to the border, my more regular recurve feels like it was designed for a draw length several inches shorter. 

Still, i know that the bow performs fine. Nothing wrong with it. shoots terrific. In fact, if thhe 'stack' could get pushed back just a little bit, I can see liking a soft 'stop' sorts. 

With the border, i have to use my alignment and expansion to get that feeling. It takes some adjustment, not having the exponential holding weight to open your fingers for you. Weird at first. I totally understand.

I would also throw in thhat while i am a fan of the super recurve design, the benefits of it will vary highly on the application of the shooter. if a fast arrow is the main thing, lots of bows with standard limb profiles can do that just fine, particularly with lower gpp values.


----------



## turbonockguy

Huntinsker said:


> I'm not going to get deep into this because I've done my back and forth about poorly done tests performed by turbonockguy but did anybody else notice that the chronograph seems to be only about 18" in front of the bow? I didn't read the whole thread so I'm not sure if it's been brought up but to use a chronograph, you must be more than 1 full arrows length from the chrono so that the arrow is completely off the bow before the arrow enters the chrono.


Chrono is 3 feet in front of bow


----------



## turbonockguy

turbonockguy said:


> Chrono is 3 feet in front of bow

















Here are photos.

I think when you look at the video where I have the camera behind the bow. and somewhat zoomed in. you get an inaccurate view of the depth of the image.


----------



## GEREP

Ok, what do we have here?


Bow weight...check

Arrow weight...check

Arrow length...check

Draw length...check

Lighting...check

Distance from chrono...check


Have you checked the radon level in your basement?

:wink:

KPC


----------



## UtahIdahoHunter

GEREP said:


> Have you checked the radon level in your basement?
> 
> :wink:
> 
> KPC


Now that's funny. Haven't thought about that.


----------



## Stone Bridge

Hank D Thoreau said:


> I have been down with the flu and will take a look at this when I am feeling better. Thought I would see where this went while putting in out of office messages for tomorrow. Back to bed.


Stay away, Hank. If that flu doesn't kill you this thread might. 

If you do find the strength, could you comment on what's a great speed you've witnessed in chrono tests with arrows around 8.5 gpp drawn to only 26 and 28 inches? Anything approaching 250fps?

Thanks


----------



## Rick Barbee

While we're waiting on more test results:

What is the fastest speeds any of you have witnessed with trad bows?
Please state bow draw weight & arrow weight if you reply.

I personally have seen a legitimate 267 fps.
That was with a 98# recurve, drawn to 29" (98# @ 29"), shooting a 600gr arrow (6.12 gpp).
This was at a pro shop being tested along with many other bows.
At the time, it was shooting faster than many of the compound bows being tested, even with some of the compounds shooting lower gpp arrows.

Rick


----------



## GEREP

I'm getting 307 fps from 47# @ 27.75" with my light weight target shafts.









:wink:

KPC


----------



## BarneySlayer

I once clocked 220 fps with my predator overdrawn to 30.5" (my best guess given the length of the arrow). Arrow was 432 gn, guessing 59# at that draw length.

This was with a naked string, no silencers. At my normal draw length it was sitting about 207, 208, also naked. I only overdrew once, but given higher draw to arrow weight, and longer power stroke, seems plausible.


----------



## Fury90flier

testing a students bow...24#, 1516'[email protected]"...about 27" DL--- got 257fps....then a 260ish....backed up to about 3-5 yards--got a bit more reasonable- 135-140fps.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

I have already posted a couple video and what need to be done. I guess no one cared to watch. Have to now agree with you Rick it turned into a witch hunt. Good luck Nick. I am out. 
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

Got the shooting done and am putting together the video . that will take a few hours so here are the numbers.

First I did the testing based on Amo specks given to me here. and made the Arrows 10 grains per pound. 


CSS compound bow
42 lbs @ 28 inches 420 grain arrow = 205.6 fps average

Darton Valiant bow
53 lbs @28 inches 530 grain arrow = 152 fps. glass laminated limbs.

Black Swan bow
42 lbs @ 28 inche3s 420 grain arrow = 171.3 fps.. This bow has the glass matt and ceramic limbs and tigerwood on the back.

Black Swan bow
42.5 lbs @ 28 inches 420 grain arrow = 182.3 fps This bow has the new carbon ceramic limbs.
In the video I mention the extra half pound but I think sometime in the clips i did not so as a note all shots with the new limbs were at 42.5 lbs.
I also did some shots with a single halogen light and some with a double halogen light source. and saw no difference in the speed readings.

As soon as I can get this to you tube I will post.


----------



## Stone Bridge

What happened to the magic bow of 254fps? You still have it? Why exclude it now? You gave all the other bow info. You confuse more than you clarify. Typical BS nonsense. Have watched this outfit for years practice subterfuge and flat out falsehoods regard trumped-up bow speeds. Would never buy one. No silly turbo nocks either.


----------



## JParanee

Turbo 

Those are very respectable numbers and thank you for the time put into this 

I would love to see a limb profile of the new limbs and an actual shooting video 

Rick Barbee 

My last round of testing with my best performing bow @ 10.42 GPP @ 28 inches averaged 200 FPS 

It was my 48 # CH 



















With my original 55 pound limbs I got 209 FPS @ 28 inches with a 530 Grain arrow which is 9.6 grains GPP 










I try and stick to around 10 GPP so I don't have much expierence with lighter shafts 

Btw 

These where both set up to hunt meaning brace height adjusted for sound not speed and string silencers quivers etc


----------



## JParanee

Stone Bridge said:


> What happened to the magic bow of 254fps? You still have it? Why exclude it now? You gave all the other bow info. You confuse more than you clarify. Typical BS nonsense. Have watched this outfit for years practice subterfuge and flat out falsehoods regard trumped-up bow speeds. Would never buy one. No silly turbo nocks either.


Stone 

He has the new bow listed 

As the last one 

Much more realistic numbers


----------



## JParanee

Sorry meant to say were not where


----------



## patrick2cents

Seems like some pretty respectable numbers there; thanks for the re-test! We all can screw-up a test now and then, I've done it a few times myself in my job or play.


----------



## voodoofire1

Witches don't exist, the truth does though, and it amazes me how gullible some are, glad to see it all cleared up!


----------



## Stone Bridge

Joe, I thought the original magic bow was 46-47 pounds, not 42.5. That original bow could shoot 8.5gpp over 250fps @ 28". That's the speed and bow we were talking about in the first place.

Are you telling me now something has changed? The bow is now lighter in draw weight and can't break 200 fps? I'm so confused by this guy and his testing. LOL

I won't be happy until he writes a very clear apology and explanation of his stupid speed claims for the new Black Swan bow that shot over 250 until it didn't.

Never should anyone buy one of these things unless they enjoy being hosed. Many of us saw this coming a mile away. 

Just saying the obvious.


----------



## Stone Bridge

patrick2cents said:


> Seems like some pretty respectable numbers there; thanks for the re-test! We all can screw-up a test now and then, I've done it a few times myself in my job or play.


These are no respectable numbers. Trad Tech low-cost glass and wood ILF limbs will equal this speed at a fraction of the cost. Axioms, etc, all will shoot this well for half nothing in cost.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Most here asked for clarification. 

Stone, some have given Nick Help by telling him what AMO standard were....So Nick changed the draw and Arrow weight and re-ran the test with the bow further back. Also, glad to see it all cleared up.
Dan


----------



## JParanee

Stone Bridge said:


> Joe, I thought the original magic bow was 46-47 pounds, not 42.5. That original bow could shoot 8.5gpp over 250fps @ 28". That's the speed and bow we were talking about in the first place.
> 
> Are you telling me now something has changed? The bow is now lighter in draw weight and can't break 200 fps? I'm so confused by this guy and his testing. LOL
> 
> I won't be happy until he writes a very clear apology and explanation of his stupid speed claims for the new Black Swan bow that shot over 250 until it didn't.
> 
> Never should anyone buy one of these things unless they enjoy being hosed. Many of us saw this coming a mile away.
> 
> Just saying the obvious.


I see what your saying and as you say I'm too nice  

How's paradise ? 

Getting plow truck warmed up we are getting a bit of snow


----------



## Blacky

Joe, I guess you'll ruin the new paint of the plow the next few days.


----------



## turbonockguy

JParanee said:


> I see what your saying and as you say I'm too nice
> 
> How's paradise ?
> 
> Getting plow truck warmed up we are getting a bit of snow


No apology. When I did the first shots I drew the arrow to the tip touching the plunger. that was 28 inches. and that is where I got the 46 and 47 lbs.
I was corrected on this string and found that for AMO you draw 2 1/4 back from the arrow tip and line that up with the index point on the bow.
So with 2 1/4 inch less draw for the Amo specs The poundage also drops.
I am thankful to the person who gave me that info. (archers helping archers) I have only in the past tested arrows I was using with no concern to amo specs.


----------



## turbonockguy

Stone Bridge said:


> What happened to the magic bow of 254fps? You still have it? Why exclude it now? You gave all the other bow info. You confuse more than you clarify. Typical BS nonsense. Have watched this outfit for years practice subterfuge and flat out falsehoods regard trumped-up bow speeds. Would never buy one. No silly turbo nocks either.


The 254 fps is a real number. I was using one of my regular goldtips at 325 grains and drawing a full 28 inches. This is not Amo specs but with the setup I used the speeds were real. There are a lot of silly people using my nocks. Rick Barbee who posts here now uses them and I think he is quite happy .


Just finished converting some of the video files to a different format . and as soon as that is done this will go to you tube. The entire shooting test takes around 14 minutes
Again no Bs the speeds In the earlier video are not fake and the chrono was accurate. I was just not set up to AMO specs.


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> No apology. When I did the first shots I drew the arrow to the tip touching the plunger. that was 28 inches. and that is where I got the 46 and 47 lbs.
> I was corrected on this string and found that for AMO you draw 2 1/4 back from the arrow tip and line that up with the index point on the bow.
> So with 2 1/4 inch less draw for the Amo specs The poundage also drops.
> I am thankful to the person who gave me that info. (archers helping archers) I have only in the past tested arrows I was using with no concern to amo specs.


AMO specs are like this.








Measure from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving, then add 1.75". Measuring 28" from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving would be an AMO DL of 29.75".


----------



## JParanee

Blacky said:


> Joe, I guess you'll ruin the new paint of the plow the next few days.


It was inevitable buddy  

You have a good memory


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> The 254 fps is a real number. I was using one of my regular goldtips at 325 grains and drawing a full 28 inches. This is not Amo specs but with the setup I used the speeds were real. There are a lot of silly people using my nocks. Rick Barbee who posts here now uses them and I think he is quite happy .
> 
> 
> Just finished converting some of the video files to a different format . and as soon as that is done this will go to you tube. The entire shooting test takes around 14 minutes
> Again no Bs the speeds In the earlier video are not fake and the chrono was accurate. I was just not set up to AMO specs.


I would still like to see a detailed DFC. That's the only thing I need to know. It will answer any other questions I might have. With that, I can calculate how efficient those light (mass) limbs are.

BM


----------



## BarneySlayer

voodoofire1 said:


> Witches don't exist, the truth does though, and it amazes me how gullible some are, glad to see it all cleared up!


Witches do exist. They may not do what they claim to do, and if that is your definitions of witches, sure. But, there are definitely people who call themselves witches, just like there are people who call themselves Buddhists. Doesn't mean that they've got to be good at Kung Fu, or brand their forearms with a pot of hot stew!


----------



## BarneySlayer

Huntinsker said:


> AMO specs are like this.
> View attachment 2144290
> 
> 
> Measure from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving, then add 1.75". Measuring 28" from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving would be an AMO DL of 29.75".


While this is unfortunately not common knowledge among people involved in the archery industry, it really should be.

I have a friend who used to run an archery shop, and I couldn't sink it into his head, even when I printed out the AMO/ATA specifications and gave it to him


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> Witches do exist. They may not do what they claim to do, and if that is your definitions of witches, sure. But, there are definitely people who call themselves witches, just like there are people who call themselves Buddhists. Doesn't mean that they've got to be good at Kung Fu, or brand their forearms with a pot of hot stew!


I used to run a Kung Fu School , but I am not a Buddhist. I have also burned my mouth with hot stew. but not my forearms.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

BM, if you want a Draw Force curve, You might have to explain, in detail how to get it? Not sure Nick is setup for that, I did not see a digital gauge on a Draw force board or his shoot machine. 
Dan


----------



## BarneySlayer

turbonockguy said:


> I used to run a Kung Fu School , but I am not a Buddhist. I have also burned my mouth with hot stew. but not my forearms.


Me too, about the stew anyway.

I do teach kids how to more effectively drive my face into the floor, or sometimes toss me on my back. That's enough for me


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Barney good points.

One last thing over the years I have ordered bows that were not received with the correct AMO draw length. After investigating I found that the grip added 1 inch in draw. I even went a far as telling them to measure to the back of the grip at 25.25+1.75=27" AMO draw!
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

Huntinsker said:


> AMO specs are like this.
> View attachment 2144290
> 
> 
> Measure from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving, then add 1.75". Measuring 28" from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving would be an AMO DL of 29.75".




OH CRAPOLA.

I am looking at this drawing. that comes out to what I did for the darton bow and the Css bow, BUT the black swan shelf is only about 2 inches wide. and I took the index mark on the arrow to the plunger which is only about 1/2 inch from the Front of the shelf. Soooo! I underdrew the Amo by about an inch. 
Well. I will reshoot the Black Swan again. It obviously will have a higher poundage, and I will have to raise the weight of the arrow. I wonder if any speed will be gained with that inch. Oh well big snowstorm tomorrow so I will be back in the basement. I will only reshoot with the new limbs.
Thank You !!
It beats shoveling snow.


----------



## Aronnax

DDSHOOTER said:


> BM, if you want a Draw Force curve, You might have to explain, in detail how to get it? Not sure Nick is setup for that, I did not see a digital gauge on a Draw force board or his shoot machine.
> Dan


There's more than one way to skin a cat- I can see that Nick has some kind of a draw-board shooing machine rig. Simply, all you need to do is stick a tape measure or yardstick on it, with the zero at the string at the bow's brace height. Then draw the bow back in 1" increments with the bow scale (digital would be a big plus) and record what it reads. An assistant with a notepad might help speed things along. Draw it all the way back to its max draw length, and that's it. Post the numbers. Should end up with around 20- 24 data points, depending on the brace height and max safe draw length.

BM


----------



## Stone Bridge

turbonockguy said:


> The 254 fps is a real number. I was using one of my regular goldtips at 325 grains and drawing a full 28 inches. This is not Amo specs but with the setup I used the speeds were real. There are a lot of silly people using my nocks. Rick Barbee who posts here now uses them and I think he is quite happy .
> 
> 
> Just finished converting some of the video files to a different format . and as soon as that is done this will go to you tube. The entire shooting test takes around 14 minutes
> Again no Bs the speeds In the earlier video are not fake and the chrono was accurate. I was just not set up to AMO specs.


Black Swan staff shooter but you don't know a thing about testing bows with a chrono. You come on a forum all excited about number many of us know are not correct, and when we point it out, you don't apologize. You wanted us to believe your first nonsense as true but do not later admit your bow is average at best.

Some professional archer you are. Black Swan is getting no boost from you. As to your turbo nocks. Rick Barbee is a nice guy and a fine string maker. That he uses them means nothing to me. Nothing against Rick. 

Doing anything to an arrow's release off the string before it leaves the bow is never a good idea. All kinds of rest clearance issues can occur, and do, as was evident in Rick's own video on plastic vanes in another thread. Some very fine world-class archers shoot straight fletching (feathers) with no helical at all. What natural curve exists in the feather is enough to stabilize the arrow. 30 inch arrows are not stubby bullets needing rapid spin to keep them from tumbling in space at 2700 fps. That you do not realize this is very telling.


----------



## Stone Bridge

JParanee said:


> I see what your saying and as you say I'm too nice
> 
> How's paradise ?
> 
> Getting plow truck warmed up we are getting a bit of snow


Joe, paradise is very nice but my wife, Pilar, and I so miss the Cuban community where we used to live. No street dancing here. Have not met a Spanish-speaking person yet. My wife and I only speak Spanish to each other. Our only connection to home. Other than that, I love the place.


----------



## turbonockguy

Stone Bridge said:


> Black Swan staff shooter but you don't know a thing about testing bows with a chrono. You come on a forum all excited about number many of us know are not correct, and when we point it out, you don't apologize. You wanted us to believe your first nonsense as true but do not later admit your bow is average at best.
> 
> Some professional archer you are. Black Swan is getting no boost from you. As to your turbo nocks. Rick Barbee is a nice guy and a fine string maker. That he uses them means nothing to me. Nothing against Rick.
> 
> Doing anything to an arrow's release off the string before it leaves the bow is never a good idea. All kinds of rest clearance issues can occur, and do, as was evident in Rick's own video on plastic vanes in another thread. Some very fine world-class archers shoot straight fletching (feathers) with no helical at all. What natural curve exists in the feather is enough to stabilize the arrow. 30 inch arrows are not stubby bullets needing rapid spin to keep them from tumbling in space at 2700 fps. That you do not realize this is very telling.


Wow!
Have a nice day . I disagree with a good bit of what your are saying but I think it would be fruitless to go into it with you.
Try bareshafting 40 yds without a turbonock?


----------



## JParanee

Stone 

Only one thing to do 

Get a Spanish speaking dog or teach the neighbors  

Are you doing any boat building or just boat using  

Have you fished yet ? 

I know you are not looking for rods but if you get a chance try one of the new Lamiglas infinity stuff with the power lux 

Think really nice sensitive graphite feel but ugly stick tough 

The Blacksalt stuff is good also


----------



## Stone Bridge

turbonockguy said:


> Wow!
> Have a nice day . I disagree with a good bit of what your are saying but I think it would be fruitless to go into it with you.
> Try bareshafting 40 yds without a turbonock?


I bareshaft out to 50 meters (54 yards) with my Olympic bow. Everyone does who knows what they're doing. I can make 18 meter groups with bareshafts as tight as my Spin-Wing arrows. You're a TRAD guy. You don't have any idea of what goes into tuning a FITA rig. Good shooting is not about gimmicks. It's about perfectly tuned equipment and thousand of hours of proper shooting paying strict attention to form. Making bareshaft fly straight is target shooting 101.

Once again you expose how little you know. I've see better shooters than me stack bareshafts at 70 meters. No shaft spin at all. You don't need it.


----------



## Stone Bridge

JParanee said:


> Stone
> 
> Only one thing to do
> 
> Get a Spanish speaking dog or teach the neighbors
> 
> Are you doing any boat building or just boat using
> 
> Have you fished yet ?
> 
> I know you are not looking for rods but if you get a chance try one of the new Lamiglas infinity stuff with the power lux
> 
> Think really nice sensitive graphite feel but ugly stick tough
> 
> The Blacksalt stuff is good also


I had many dogs in Key West that only responded to Spanish. It was all they heard in the boat shop. 

I'm completely out of the boat building business. I will be getting a sailboat in the near future but will have to moor it in Honolulu thirty miles to our south. No safe anchorages in my area - too exposed to the easterlies. We are on the weather side of the island. It will be a boat that will make my boat-building mentor and father-in-law vomit: a glass hull and not a double-ended canoe hull as we always built. It will be a ketch-rig of shallow draft. Something around 45 feet. I have no means to maintain a wood hull now. I only built wooden boats in the past because I love wood-working and wooden boats are elegant to look at. Plus you can charge 50% more for one. Gun to my head, I'd rather own a good Clorox bottle sailboat. LOL Many are made with lots of carbon fiber in the hulls today. Lighter and stronger than any wood boat. I'm glad my wife's father does not read this forum. He taught me from age 12. Wood all the way with him.

I have not had time or inclination to fish yet. Honestly, I'm too busy paddling offshore and now coaching (assistant) a high school outrigger team. Nice kids all interested in being outside doing something healthy and fun. If I'm not running, lifting, or shooting my bow, I'm on the water 4-5 hours a day. My wife is racing with me in a double outrigger we bought. She is a very good athlete and very fit. Big girl at 5-11 and 137 pounds. Together we can really drive an outrigger in the mixed class. I should have retired ten years ago at 48 and moved here. Wife now feels the same way. She retired from a major commercial carrier as a pilot a few months ago. She's only 48. I'll be 58 in March. I don't feel old yet. It's coming but not tomorrow.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Aronnax, Which is it 4" BH or 8" BH or Both?
Maybe those are SC limbs and are built to only a 25" draw length?
Seems to me that Nick is only 1" off from AMO and 4-5 pound high at full draw? Pretty stacky.
Dan


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Never mind. I am out.
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

Stone Bridge said:


> I bareshaft out to 50 meters (54 yards) with my Olympic bow. Everyone does who knows what they're doing. I can make 18 meter groups with bareshafts as tight as my Spin-Wing arrows. You're a TRAD guy. You don't have any idea of what goes into tuning a FITA rig. Good shooting is not about gimmicks. It's about perfectly tuned equipment and thousand of hours of proper shooting paying strict attention to form. Making bareshaft fly straight is target shooting 101.
> 
> Once again you expose how little you know. I've see better shooters than me stack bareshafts at 70 meters. No shaft spin at all. You don't need it.


If you can bareshaft that far in essence are not the spin wings gimmicks? Just kidding!

I may not be the sharpest knife in the garage, or the brightest light in the drawer. But I do not go around flaunting my stupidity.

The observations you make about me teach me a good deal about you. 
and that makes me sad. 

I wish you the best and I hope you continue to enjoy the sport. as I do.


----------



## Rick Barbee

Come on guys. Can't you see that Nick is working hard at trying to appease everyone in their suggested testing parameters.
Seriously, y'all need to slack up some. Sheesh. 

By the way - I love my Turbonocks. They do wonders for arrow stability.
No, you can't just stick them in the shaft in place of a standard nock & expect to see any benefit. 
The arrows have to be retuned, because they will behave quite differently as compared to the standard nocks.
They are quite a bit more work to install & align than standard nocks, so if they didn't work for me, I would not use them. It's as simple as that.
I'm to damn lazy to use something that creates more work without any added benefit. 

Rick


----------



## JParanee

Stone Bridge said:


> I had many dogs in Key West that only responded to Spanish. It was all they heard in the boat shop.
> 
> I'm completely out of the boat building business. I will be getting a sailboat in the near future but will have to moor it in Honolulu thirty miles to our south. No safe anchorages in my area - too exposed to the easterlies. We are on the weather side of the island. It will be a boat that will make my boat-building mentor and father-in-law vomit: a glass hull and not a double-ended canoe hull as we always built. It will be a ketch-rig of shallow draft. Something around 45 feet. I have no means to maintain a wood hull now. I only built wooden boats in the past because I love wood-working and wooden boats are elegant to look at. Plus you can charge 50% more for one. Gun to my head, I'd rather own a good Clorox bottle sailboat. LOL Many are made with lots of carbon fiber in the hulls today. Lighter and stronger than any wood boat. I'm glad my wife's father does not read this forum. He taught me from age 12. Wood all the way with him.
> 
> I have not had time or inclination to fish yet. Honestly, I'm too busy paddling offshore and now coaching (assistant) a high school outrigger team. Nice kids all interested in being outside doing something healthy and fun. If I'm not running, lifting, or shooting my bow, I'm on the water 4-5 hours a day. My wife is racing with me in a double outrigger we bought. She is a very good athlete and very fit. Big girl at 5-11 and 137 pounds. Together we can really drive an outrigger in the mixed class. I should have retired ten years ago at 48 and moved here. Wife now feels the same way. She retired from a major commercial carrier as a pilot a few months ago. She's only 48. I'll be 58 in March. I don't feel old yet. It's coming but not tomorrow.


As you know I grew up working fishing marinas so I understand the glass over wood full and well  

Shoot me an email and keep me posted on the boat 

Spent some time around Jennneau and Hunter sailboats when I was involved with South Florida Y & C 

Good luck on the boat aqusition


----------



## Easykeeper

Thanks for rerunning your tests Turbo...:thumbs_up 

Your original claim took some justified heat and questioning and I for one appreciate your effort to replicate it with the advice of other members. When you are a vendor and put up extraordinary numbers, even if you claim no affiliation or advertising, you have to expect people to cast a skeptical eye. Your new bow still shows great performance and now things seem more believable.


----------



## turbonockguy

Easykeeper said:


> Thanks for rerunning your tests Turbo...:thumbs_up
> 
> Your original claim took some justified heat and questioning and I for one appreciate your effort to replicate it with the advice of other members. When you are a vendor and put up extraordinary numbers, even if you claim no affiliation or advertising, you have to expect people to cast a skeptical eye. Your new bow still shows great performance and now things seem more believable.


Thank you!!
One thing those numbers were real chronographed speeds. using my 325 grain arrows. they are just not to AMO Specs.

I am affiliated With Black Swan in as much as I shoot one of their bows and A good many of their staff shooters use my nocks. Arvid and I became friends shortly after meeting as a result of his shooters. We share a similar background. Both grew up in a gun shop. Both into the martial Arts. He is a really good shooter, in archery and gun.(Nam Sniper) I am a so so shooter, and basically asked Arvid if I could be an honorary staff shooter. He was kind enough to agree.
I talked to him today and If I remember correctly one he was making one of the new bows for one of his shooters that is also a Texas state champ. who also is a Turbonock shooter because of him.

I will be totally honest here. I failed hs algebra, & geometry, yet somehow I figured out how to put rifling on arrows ( some call it a gimmick)
I have been called a lot of things on this site over the years. not much positive. but that is ok . 
But when my grandkids see Randy Oitker set new world records with Umpa"s nocks. I smile!
I talked to Randy not long ago and he is working on breaking another world record this summer. 

some people see no value in making an arrow spin fast, but the main reason I developed it was to produce more humane kills. and this is common sense.
A simple question explains this. Which would you rather be hit with an arrow with a broadhead spinning at 400 rpm or one spinning at 6000 rpm?


----------



## turbonockguy

Rick Barbee said:


> Come on guys. Can't you see that Nick is working hard at trying to appease everyone in their suggested testing parameters.
> Seriously, y'all need to slack up some. Sheesh.
> 
> By the way - I love my Turbonocks. They do wonders for arrow stability.
> No, you can't just stick them in the shaft in place of a standard nock & expect to see any benefit.
> The arrows have to be retuned, because they will behave quite differently as compared to the standard nocks.
> They are quite a bit more work to install & align than standard nocks, so if they didn't work for me, I would not use them. It's as simple as that.
> I'm to damn lazy to use something that creates more work without any added benefit.
> 
> Rick


Perhaps I will have to do some tests with the string I got from you. Then I will blame you for things I can not explain!!!!!!!!!


----------



## stoutstuff

Nick, You're a RHINO and I respect you for that!


----------



## Rick Barbee

turbonockguy said:


> Perhaps I will have to do some tests with the string I got from you. Then I will blame you for things I can not explain!!!!!!!!!


Haa Haa Nick. I've been on that end of the stick before. 
Get after it My Friend. 

Rick


----------



## Stone Bridge

turbonockguy said:


> If you can bareshaft that far in essence are not the spin wings gimmicks? Just kidding!
> 
> I may not be the sharpest knife in the garage, or the brightest light in the drawer. But I do not go around flaunting my stupidity.
> 
> The observations you make about me teach me a good deal about you.
> and that makes me sad.
> 
> I wish you the best and I hope you continue to enjoy the sport. as I do.


Pal, you don't have to flaunt your stupidity. It's rather obvious, even from space.


----------



## Stone Bridge

turbonockguy said:


> Thank you!!
> One thing those numbers were real chronographed speeds. using my 325 grain arrows. they are just not to AMO Specs.
> 
> I am affiliated With Black Swan in as much as I shoot one of their bows and A good many of their staff shooters use my nocks. Arvid and I became friends shortly after meeting as a result of his shooters. We share a similar background. Both grew up in a gun shop. Both into the martial Arts. He is a really good shooter, in archery and gun.(Nam Sniper) I am a so so shooter, and basically asked Arvid if I could be an honorary staff shooter. He was kind enough to agree.
> I talked to him today and If I remember correctly one he was making one of the new bows for one of his shooters that is also a Texas state champ. who also is a Turbonock shooter because of him.
> 
> I will be totally honest here. I failed hs algebra, & geometry, yet somehow I figured out how to put rifling on arrows ( some call it a gimmick)
> I have been called a lot of things on this site over the years. not much positive. but that is ok .
> But when my grandkids see Randy Oitker set new world records with Umpa"s nocks. I smile!
> I talked to Randy not long ago and he is working on breaking another world record this summer.
> 
> some people see no value in making an arrow spin fast, but the main reason I developed it was to produce more humane kills. and this is common sense.
> A simple question explains this. Which would you rather be hit with an arrow with a broadhead spinning at 400 rpm or one spinning at 6000 rpm?


Spinning actually reduces penetration on a broadhead. We're trying to make a surgical cut all the way through the animal, not augur fence posts holes. 

I couldn't help myself.


----------



## Rick Barbee

Stone Bridge said:


> Spinning actually reduces penetration on a broadhead. We're trying to make a surgical cut all the way through the animal, not augur fence posts holes.
> 
> I couldn't help myself.


Stoney, you would think that *(I did too, before I tested it)*, but my testing experience was exactly the opposite.

I bought a brand new 18/1 Rhinehart target to do the penetration testing.
I used the same arrow throughout the entire testing.
The only difference was the nocks. One series of testing with a turbonock, and the other with a standard press in nock.

I even used a blunted & dull broadhead to create more resistance & impede penetration as much as possible.

I shot that arrow over & over again, and consistently got 16% better/deeper penetration with the turbonock than I got with the standard nock.

Can I explain it? Nope. Can't even come close, but I'm not going to question the results for my own personal decision.
16% may not seem like a lot, but it's enough to make me want to continue using the turbonocks.

Here is a video showing the first test session on the new target. I shot a lot more than this with the same results continuously.






Scientifically conducted test? Maybe. Maybe not, but the real world results for me were enough to convince me.

Rick


----------



## ranchoarcher

Some tough customers here. The questioning of facts turned into a you're crap and look how great I am fiasco. Numbers on the bow ain't bad. But who cares who's a pilot?


----------



## Stone Bridge

Rick, I believe your test findings. I also believe OSB's penetration tests he did on Youtube using lighter arrows vs. heavy out of the same bow. He got better penetration using light arrows. That was the same thing I found when I tested - lighter, faster arrows drove in deeper when shot from the same bow. Not a popular finding for many but true in my tests. So I have no issue with your tests. The heart of my problem is Nick and his presentation of flawed speed information getting presented as fact in the face of many others like me with much more experience than him in every kind of archery (not just TRAD). He gets caught with his pants down and still will not back up and apologize to those who would have shelled out big bucks to Black Swan, for whom he is a shill, because guys like me cornered him. That's not the mark of a trustworthy guy if you ask me.

Whether someone wants to dislike me for being painfully blunt? I couldn't care less. I don't join forums to make friends with everyone. Not everyone is worth it.


----------



## Rick Barbee

No problem Stoney.

Just do me a favor, and try to take notice of how Nick is trying to work his testing according to our suggestions.
He's not trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes. 
Now that he knows/has some set standards for testing maybe he will come back sometime in the future with some additional nock testing.

I can say this with relatively small reservation - Compound bows are much more capable of taking advantage of the turbonock benefit,
than are trad bows, so I can see where with a compound the difference might be huge compared to what I am getting with my trad bow.

Just some (respectably presented) food for thought.

Rick


----------



## steve morley

Rick what bow you shooting, makes a lovely low thud sound


----------



## Rick Barbee

steve morley said:


> Rick what bow you shooting, makes a lovely low thud sound


Hey there Steve.
In that test it is my set of Tradtech Carbon/wood (clear glass) limbs on a 21" ILF warf riser I made out of an old Allan compound riser..
I shot it set at 66#. Very sweet shooting bow, and very quiet.

Rick


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Rick Barbee said:


> Stoney, you would think that *(I did too, before I tested it)*, but my testing experience was exactly the opposite.
> 
> I bought a brand new 18/1 Rhinehart target to do the penetration testing.
> I used the same arrow throughout the entire testing.
> The only difference was the nocks. One series of testing with a turbonock, and the other with a standard press in nock.
> 
> I even used a blunted & dull broadhead to create more resistance & impede penetration as much as possible.
> 
> I shot that arrow over & over again, and consistently got 16% better/deeper penetration with the turbonock than I got with the standard nock.
> 
> Can I explain it? Nope. Can't even come close, but I'm not going to question the results for my own personal decision.
> 16% may not seem like a lot, but it's enough to make me want to continue using the turbonocks.
> 
> Here is a video showing the first test session on the new target. I shot a lot more than this with the same results continuously.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Scientifically conducted test? Maybe. Maybe not, but the real world results for me were enough to convince me.
> 
> Rick


It seems to me that the additional spin would lend itself quite well to penetration on bone when using a single bevel broadhead if Ashbys findings are to be believed about the spin of the arrow combined with the single bevel broadhead causing greater splitting of bone.


----------



## Rick Barbee

Tradbow Guy said:


> It seems to me that the additional spin would lend itself quite well to penetration on bone when using a single bevel broadhead if Ashbys findings are to be believed about the spin of the arrow combined with the single bevel broadhead causing greater splitting of bone.


I've considered trying a test of this very thing, but I love my VPA 3blade heads. I've shot completely through everything I've ever shot with them, which include some thick shield & heavy bone on some large hogs.

I still might test some single bevels in combination with the turbonocks someday soon. Never know - I might like the results. 

Rick


----------



## stoutstuff

No apology from Nick needed on my part and I wasn't shilled - no snake oil!
I met Arvid in person, shot his bows on site and ordered one a few days later. I knew what I was laying my hard earned cash on ahead of time. I was so misled that I bought another bow from him a year and a half later. They are not my only bows.
I really enjoy trying different things - it is the spice of life! I'm looking forward to trying some Border Limbs on my newly acquired Spig 650 or will it be Uukha's or Sky's or Hoyt's or Win's or??? So many decisions!
Until I find something more intriguing, a Black Swan will be in these Colorado mountains with me pursuing elk. 
Oh yeah, the fmj's with turbonocks, fletched with vanes and shot off the shelf are in the quiver too.
Time for that sweet tea Rick...
Jay


----------



## patrick2cents

Stone Bridge said:


> Rick, I believe your test findings. I also believe OSB's penetration tests he did on Youtube using lighter arrows vs. heavy out of the same bow. He got better penetration using light arrows. That was the same thing I found when I tested - lighter, faster arrows drove in deeper when shot from the same bow. Not a popular finding for many but true in my tests. So I have no issue with your tests. The heart of my problem is Nick and his presentation of flawed speed information getting presented as fact in the face of many others like me with much more experience than him in every kind of archery (not just TRAD). He gets caught with his pants down and still will not back up and apologize to those who would have shelled out big bucks to Black Swan, for whom he is a shill, because guys like me cornered him. That's not the mark of a trustworthy guy if you ask me.
> 
> Whether someone wants to dislike me for being painfully blunt? I couldn't care less. I don't join forums to make friends with everyone. Not everyone is worth it.


Eh... you aren't really being blunt, you're being unnecessarily arrogant about something that really doesn't matter that much (it's a bent stick with a string shooting another stick). Nick is a good guy that has been working hard to present a product using his own ideas. I don't think he is an engineer or scientist, but he sure works hard at what he does. His turbonocks are actually quite useful for shooting big broadheads with smaller feathers and I know he put a lot of work bringing that to market.


----------



## GEREP

I'm a firm believer that when it comes to making comparisons, the only testing that really matters is that which is done independently, using precise, consistent testing methods and parameters. Everything else is just what some guy got, using a dozen or more different components, measurements, methods, and tactics. It means *absolutely nothing* (at best), especially when the difference between "leading edge" and "bleeding edge" might be 10 fps or less, and any one of those components, measurements, methods or tactics can account for most, if not all of the difference.

What really surprises me are the standards we hold some to when it comes to those precise testing parameters, all the while giving others a pass on the same.

KPC


----------



## turbonockguy

An Apology.

Last evening I finished the video and converted to AVI. then uploded to you tube. when I went to bed it was 95% uploaded. I got up this morning it is still 95% uploaded. 
So I am converting the video to an mpg4 file the quality may not be quite as good but It should be good enough.

I am Sorry for the Delay.

I also want to thank those whoehave made some positive responses.
I did not want to turn this into another "word war" as my original intention was to show my test with the 325 grain arrows. I was looking at speed comparisons, not amo specs. when the video finally gets up you will still see those same speed differences just with heavier arrows at a lower speed.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Rick, moment of inertia is your friend here both in penetration and flight in windy conditions. Previously posted April 2014.
http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/MomentofInertiaRod.html
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

Well here it is. I have on my crash helmet. flack vest, full contact gloves, ninja hood, LaCrosse lowtremp boots,mouth guard,eye patch,foaming mouthwash,did I mention eyeliner? In the first section I called the Black Swan (Darton) after using the mouthwash I did correct myself!
I found out that the black swan was shot abut 1 inch shy of AMO so I will do another chrono test with one inch added, poundage check and correct arrow weight.


----------



## voodoofire1

Nick, I'm really glad to see you have cleared this up, I see though that you are only thanking those that made a positive response, seems to me that those naysayers kinda did you a favor too, had they kept their mouths shut here you could have blasted the original video all over the net and you along with Black Swan would have looked truly foolish upon further testing, archers helping archers sometimes means protecting them from themselves... Just sayin...

A+ on the video!


----------



## JParanee

You certainly get an A for effort  

You went to a lot of trouble and for that I am thankful 

Congrats on the new limbs and enjoy your new bow


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> OH CRAPOLA.
> 
> I am looking at this drawing. that comes out to what I did for the darton bow and the Css bow, BUT the black swan shelf is only about 2 inches wide. and I took the index mark on the arrow to the plunger which is only about 1/2 inch from the Front of the shelf. Soooo! I underdrew the Amo by about an inch.
> Well. I will reshoot the Black Swan again. It obviously will have a higher poundage, and I will have to raise the weight of the arrow. I wonder if any speed will be gained with that inch. Oh well big snowstorm tomorrow so I will be back in the basement. I will only reshoot with the new limbs.
> Thank You !!
> It beats shoveling snow.





turbonockguy said:


> Well here it is. I have on my crash helmet. flack vest, full contact gloves, ninja hood, LaCrosse lowtremp boots,mouth guard,eye patch,foaming mouthwash,did I mention eyeliner? In the first section I called the Black Swan (Darton) after using the mouthwash I did correct myself!
> I found out that the black swan was shot abut 1 inch shy of AMO so I will do another chrono test with one inch added, poundage check and correct arrow weight.


So did you recheck the actual weight of the Black Swan with the new limbs while drawing to an actual 28" AMO length? I thought you underdrew it which would actually give it more weight and length? Just to make sure, when you measure AMO DL, the width of the shelf or riser doesn't matter. You always add 1.75" to the measurement from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving. The picture just happens to show the 1.75" line landing at the front of the riser.


----------



## turbonockguy

voodoofire1 said:


> Nick, I'm really glad to see you have cleared this up, I see though that you are only thanking those that made a positive response, seems to me that those naysayers kinda did you a favor too, had they kept their mouths shut here you could have blasted the original video all over the net and you along with Black Swan would have looked truly foolish upon further testing, archers helping archers sometimes means protecting them from themselves... Just sayin...


I agree with you! But in reality over the years I have rarely had this many positive posts when issues happen. I appreciate most of the "nay sayers"
Criticism of what I did was fair. but those that use personal attacks I as well as this site can do without. but then again we do have freedom of speech.

As to black swan looking foolish I disagree.

I am not taking back that first test. Those were real speeds through the chrono. I even posted the grain weight of the arrow. They were not done to AMO specs!
Those were the arrows I was shooting. 

I think the AMO specs were done A good many years ago to set standards. based on the maximum efficiency of bow materials. Anything over the specs would reduce efficiency as well as anything under the specs would. 

So here is a real what if.

What if this new material is more efficient to the point that the Amo standards do not fit? 
We have IBO standards, Fita ,standards AMO, Where everyone here says AMO is 10gpp, Arvid tells me it is 9gpp. and is what he uses as a correct standard.
Hell! It sure is confusing.

So now you see Amo speeds. in this video. I have been safely shooting the 325 grain arrow for over a year with the original carbon ceramic limbs. no issues.

I will continue to use the 325 for target shooting. I can live with 250 fps. I like the flatter trajectory that I obviously have over a 420 grain arrow.( I did not run tests on the trajectory difference) just a common sense estimate.
If there is a failure I will post.


----------



## voodoofire1

I do agree about the personal attacks, they were uncalled for, and I guess freedom of speech includes stupid talk too, ya can't fix stupid... But duct tape can help.


----------



## turbonockguy

Huntinsker said:


> So did you recheck the actual weight of the Black Swan with the new limbs while drawing to an actual 28" AMO length? I thought you underdrew it which would actually give it more weight and length? Just to make sure, when you measure AMO DL, the width of the shelf or riser doesn't matter. You always add 1.75" to the measurement from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving. The picture just happens to show the 1.75" line landing at the front of the riser.


I under drew . so I am going to do another video. I will draw the extra inch ( I will measure exactly) I will then draw the bow on the bowscale. I am guessing it will be around 44 lbs rather than 42.5 and I will then set up an arrow that weighs 440 grains or whatever the bow weight is. 
I do nt think there will be too much of a difference, but I am interested in the outcome.


----------



## Rick Barbee

Hey Nick. Great video.

Here's a little piece of info for you - That little brass weight that comes with your scale is made to hook onto
that peg at the front of the balance beam. It is for weighing over 500gr, and allows you to go all the way to 1005gr.

You zero your scale as normal (without the weight hooked on).
Then you hook the weight on, lay in your arrow, and then adjust the scale with the offsetting sliding weights to achieve zero again.
Add the total of the sliding weights to 500, and you have your arrows weight.

This arrow weighs exactly 620gr. You can see I added the 120gr indicated by the scale to the 500gr offset to get the total weight.
These Lyman Pro scales are very accurate when set up properly. 






























Rick


----------



## turbonockguy

voodoofire1 said:


> I do agree about the personal attacks, they were uncalled for, and I guess freedom of speech includes stupid talk too, ya can't fix stupid... But duct tape can help.


When I communicate with engineers I sometimes feel quite stupid !

What keeps me going is a quote by Albetr Einstein, a really smart guy!!! "Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid"


OH!!! I guess you saw the duct tape. ( I thought it was Duck Tape) on various parts of my chrono. over the years I have managed to "slightly" damage the light diffusers"
I used to do Turbonock speed tests at the bow and then at the target to see what the speed loss was. once in a while even with the shooting machine. a 60 yd shot would go a little off course.


----------



## turbonockguy

Rick Barbee said:


> Hey Nick. Great video.
> 
> Here's a little piece of info for you - That little brass weight that comes with your scale is made to hook onto
> that peg at the front of the balance beam. It is for weighing over 500gr, and allows you to go all the way to 1005gr.
> 
> You zero your scale as normal (without the weight hooked on).
> Then you hook the weight on, lay in your arrow, and then adjust the scale with the offsetting sliding weights to achieve zero again.
> Add the total of the sliding weights to 500, and you have your arrows weight.
> 
> This arrow weighs exactly 620gr. You can see I added the 120gr indicated by the scale to the 500gr offset to get the total weight.
> These Lyman Pro scales are very accurate when set up properly.
> 
> View attachment 2144968
> 
> View attachment 2144969
> 
> View attachment 2144970
> 
> View attachment 2144971
> 
> 
> Rick


I thought that was for fishin!
Thanks. Thanks a lot!!!!!!!!!! Now I really feel Stupid!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (COL) crying out loud.


----------



## Rick Barbee

Haa Haa Nick, don't feel bad.
I bought my scale used with no instructions, so it was a while before I found out that little tidbit myself. 

Rick


----------



## GEREP

Nick:

Thank you for taking the time to get things as accurate an consistent as possible.

*OBVIOUSLY*, like many here thought, the numbers are nowhere near what you originally posted, but I for one feel that it was an honest error on your part. Even so, they are still very respectable numbers at 10gpp, all within the ballpark of some of the setups that are touted to be some the best performing limbs on the market. 

At a full 10 gpp, drawn to 28", the Black Swan showed *182 fps.*

According to Pete Ward's testing, the ACS-CX at 9.8 gpp, drawn to 28", showed *188 fps.*

The Border Covert Hunter, at 9.8 gpp, drawn to 28", showed *188 fps.*

The Tradtech Extreme BF/ Titan combo, at 9.5 gpp, drawn to 28", showed *188 fps.* 


Granted, there are some differences in testing parameters between your testing and Mr. Ward's testing, but it does go a long way in showing that at the end of the day, there really isn't a whole lot of difference between top end limbs. All marketing claims aside, in the real world, for the average traditional archer and bow hunter, there isn't enough difference between them to even worry about, let alone be able to detect without electronic equipment. 

Some people might well prefer the way one bow feels or behaves over another, but chasing raw performance is a fools errand. 

In my opinion of course.

Thanks again.

KPC


----------



## voodoofire1

Nick, the duct tape wasn't in reference to your equipment, there's a saying going around that states:"you can't fix stupid, but duct tape keeps em quiet"......I just changed it a little.


----------



## turbonockguy

voodoofire1 said:


> Nick, the duct tape wasn't in reference to your equipment, there's a saying going around that states:"you can't fix stupid, but duct tape keeps em quiet"......I just changed it a little.


I just changed it a little more!

Here is another of my favorite quotes from that Einstein guy "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."


----------



## BarneySlayer

turbonockguy said:


> I think the AMO specs were done A good many years ago to set standards. based on the maximum efficiency of bow materials. Anything over the specs would reduce efficiency as well as anything under the specs would.


Can you explain this with any kind of physical justification, or is this an intuitive feeling ?

I really admire your enthusiasm, but you have to admit, you really do like to put yourself out there by the seat of your pants


----------



## BarneySlayer

turbonockguy said:


> I just changed it a little more!
> 
> Here is another of my favorite quotes from that Einstein guy "We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."


Sure, though you have to identify something, such as accurately documented testing methodology, fundamental physics on a non-astronomical or non-quantum level, before you throw some other reality forward holding it up as 'just as good.'

I think you're earnest, but you don't give a presentation of your results that implies you're exactly an engineer or scientist. I'm not saying that what you're doing is wrong, in of it self, but you also have to realize that there are standards, and if you reference a standard, such as Draw Length, it is important that what you're talking about is what everybody else has come to accept as a given.

It's really cool to be passionate and want to share, I'm just saying to be careful, and qualify what you're saying. If somebody is saying that your results defy physics, don't just jump into the defensive "Every new technology seems unbelievable to those who don't understand" posture. Invite critique of the results, and do your best to address them. Do that, and everything's fine


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> Can you explain this with any kind of physical justification, or is this an intuitive feeling ?
> 
> I really admire your enthusiasm, but you have to admit, you really do like to put yourself out there by the seat of your pants


Yesterday,Arvid who was on the committee that set up Amo standards. gave me a layman's explanation.

How else do you fly?


----------



## BarneySlayer

I thought AMO was 9gpp, 30 inch draw. not that it has to be THE standard, but I thought that's what it was. what did I miss?

Just to be clear, nick. Are you saying that with an arrow slightly over 7 gpp, with a 28" AMO draw, you're getting 250 fps?


----------



## gnome

Stone Bridge said:


> Whether someone wants to dislike me for being painfully blunt? I couldn't care less. I don't join forums to make friends with everyone. Not everyone is worth it.


You call it painfully blunt. I call it something else! This style of posting is what brings this form down, not build it up.


----------



## Str8 Shooter

BarneySlayer said:


> I thought AMO was 9gpp, 30 inch draw. not that it has to be THE standard, but I thought that's what it was. what did I miss?
> 
> Just to be clear, nick. Are you saying that with an arrow slightly over 7 gpp, with a 28" AMO draw, you're getting 250 fps?



AMO standard of testing is a 30" draw, 60# bow, and 540 gr. arrow (9 gpp). The method people asked Nick to test was with a 28" draw and 10 gpp, most likely because that is much closer to the average guy's setup. Either way, it provides a uniform comparison. 

The trouble with testing and posting results is when people confuse terminology or don't measure based on accepted standards. Take draw length. AMO is measured as the distance from the deepest part of the grip + 1 3/4". That's the method most people use. However, some folks and bow makers used to measure using "true draw" which was just the measurement to the deepest part of the grip. So, if you said I pull 28" and you use true draw and I use AMO there is 1 3/4" variance in draw... and likely a discrepancy in poundage, accurate gpp, etc. It's easy to see how one simple measurement can skew numbers. 

The same goes for scales, arrows, whatever. Accurate numbers require calibrated equipment so everything comes out correctly. That's why internet numbers are interesting but not always relevant.


----------



## Attack

Stone Bridge, why are you taking this so personal? Haave either Turbonock or Black Swan wronged you in some way? It seems you have something personal against them. I am skeptical of the 250fps myself but I see no need to insult anyone.


----------



## GEREP

AMO is 9 gpp @ 30"

IBO is 5 gpp @ 30"

KPC


----------



## Tradbow Guy

The front page of the Black Swan website says "The bows are smooth to draw and shoot, forgiving, accurate, and very fast. With IBO speeds of 300 FPS!" Yet when I look through their bows their fastest they say is 225 FPS. I notice they show AMO on the website but then mention the IBO of 300 fps. IBO is whats commonly used in compound shooting so I would think an IBO of 300 FPS would be pretty impressive out of a tradbow, since only a few years ago IBO 300 was what the top compound bows were getting.


----------



## ranchoarcher

What might be a good idea is run both AMO and IBO testing on it. 

Got this from another site. 

IBO
Total Arrow Weight = 350 grains (5 grains per lb of draw weight)
Draw Weight = 70 lbs
Draw Length = 30"

AMO
Total Arrow Weight = 540 grains
Draw Weight = 60 lbs
Draw Length = 30"

As an option use some arrows at 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 GPP drawn to a realistic 28 inches and see what those numbers produce. Ain't a lot of us shooting 60 and 70 lbs bows and drawing out to 30.

There is one thing Stone does bring up that is something I've wondered about. What ever happened to that star method shooting style that was supposed to revolutionize trad archery? The guy promoting it and never answering a direct question about it vanished. :noidea:


----------



## Beendare

My take; I like small business guys and the world needs more of them.

Now if a guy is looking to purchase cutting edge performance with carbon limbs it only makes sense to go with a tried and true company....and if you are going to spend that kind of $$- Border has to be at the top of that short list. I wish the best to Black Swan as they make some nice stuff but it still seems like they are still trying to find their niche.....


----------



## ghostgoblin22

I'm not to familiar with black swan bows, how much do they typically run??


----------



## Stone Bridge

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2038390

If you all understood about Black Swan and the STAR method and all the nonsensical claims by the owner and his shills, you'd stay clear. Do some searching on the STAR method of shooting and Black Swan. Search on the exaggerated speed claims. Look at Black Swans webpage claims of 225fps IBO speeds. We just saw a real Swan barely break 180 and the shill first told us 254. Black Swan has a very bad history of inventing the ultimate bow. All crap. Owner used to set world records shooting and beat Howard Hill. No proof of this anywhere. Many other unfounded feats of athletics. All bullbleep.

I've followed this outfit since the late 1980s. I wouldn't go near them and would not recommend anyone else touch them. Do some reading. I have lived it over the years as a person who has been in the archery scene since the early 1970s. BS does not always stand for Black Swan.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Stone Bridge said:


> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2038390
> 
> If you all understood about Black Swan and the STAR method and all the nonsensical claims by the owner and his shills, you'd stay clear. Do some searching on the STAR method of shooting and Black Swan. Search on the exaggerated speed claims. Look at Black Swans webpage claims of 225fps IBO speeds. =.


Actually it claims 225 AMO and 300 IBO. And the owner really says he beat Howard Hill? Lol.


----------



## Sanford

Stone, you do know that Earl Hoyt stole that ILF design from BS, or so the claim goes


----------



## BarneySlayer

I am all for being nice, though I've got to say, in a car wreck kind of way, this thread is hilarious


----------



## patrick2cents

Stone Bridge said:


> And I live in paradise now. You should have known me in Miami when the traffic comes to gridlock, your AC isn't working and it's 95 F. The only good thing would be knowing I had my Hoyt ILF rig in the backseat and not some piece-of-crap Black Swan abortion.
> 
> I do look on the bright side sometimes.


I'm with you on traffic getting to you... I live in a rather remote portion of NC now and that seems to help (I lived outside DC for a while and that was bad).


----------



## turbonockguy

I have been waiting for at least one person to have the Duh! moment. It has not happened. It did happen for me.

With all the arguing and claims of sloppyness. and fraud, and shill etc. I shot the test three times. 

The first test I did was an experiment I did just to see if I could see and understand the performance differences in My Black Swan with carbon ceramic lmbs and the Darton bow with glass laminate limbs.
If you review the video it shows a difference.

first test .
darton bow on the scale was showing 53 lbs and launched a 390 grain arrow to a speed of 230 fps through the chrono.
black swan on the scale was showing 46 lbs and launched the same arrow to a speed of 242 fps.

I then did a second test.
I used the 26 inch arrow that I commonly shoot with the bow.
Darton on the scale at 26 in was showing 46 lbs and launched a 325 grain arrow to speeds 246, 248 fps
Black Swan on the scale at 26 in was showing 41 lbs and launched same arrow to speeds of 253,254,257 fps.

Now some folks said these tesst meant nothing because I did not use AMO standards. The bows the arrows and the chrono did not know they were not shooting Amo standards. 

So I did a third test shooting as close to AMO Specs as I could.
Darton showed 53 lbs on the scale at AMO 28 inches. and launched a 530 grain arrow to 152 fps. 10 grains per pound.
Black Swan showed 42.5 lbs on the scale at AMO 28 inches and launched a 420 grain arrow to 182.3 fps. 10 grains per pound.

Any duh moments yet???

Here is what I see. through all the testing the chrono shows same results.
In the first two tests where both bows used the exact same weight arrow ( which should have been and advantage for the higher poundage Darton) the Black Swan produced higher speeds with less poundage.

In the AMO test the Black Swan still Produced higher speeds with less poundage.

In my opinion this does not break the laws of physics ! It cant! Duh!!

What this does show is that the Carbon Ceramic limb material is just more efficient in transferring its' stored energy to the arrow.
Possible reasons. The Carbon ceramic are lighter and have less mass which allows them to accelerate faster. also that carbon ceramic material is just a more efficient spring than the glass resin and wood laminate. After all the bow is just a spring.


----------



## GEREP

Here's the way I see it.

Whether you like Black Swan or not, when comparing Nicks results using 10 gpp drawn to 28", there is less than 5% difference between that and the results Pete Ward had for the following bows using close to the same parameters.

*At a full 10 gpp, drawn to 28", the Black Swan showed 182 fps.

According to Pete Ward's testing:

The ACS-CX at 9.8 gpp, drawn to 28", showed 188 fps.

The Border Covert Hunter, at 9.8 gpp, drawn to 28", showed 188 fps.

The Tradtech Extreme BF/ Titan combo, at 9.5 gpp, drawn to 28", showed 188 fps.* 


To 99% of us, that is like buying this truck...









...over this truck...









...because it has 1/4" more ground clearance.

When in actuality, the only place you it's *ever* going to be driven is here...









KPC


----------



## newell38

I've had Arvid make me a few bows over the years and I have zero complaints. The 2013 hybrid I have is one of the three best shooting and fastest bows I've had my hands on. The other two are my acs and my whippenstick phoenix. Those 3 bows are neck and neck. I've had close to half a thousand bows over the years and the black swan ranks near the top for me. Thanks for the info mr turbo nock. I think I'm gonna pass on the darton and call Arvid instead


----------



## turbonockguy

newell38 said:


> I've had Arvid make me a few bows over the years and I have zero complaints. The 2013 hybrid I have is one of the three best shooting and fastest bows I've had my hands on. The other two are my acs and my whippenstick phoenix. Those 3 bows are neck and neck. I've had close to half a thousand bows over the years and the black swan ranks near the top for me. Thanks for the info mr turbo nock. I think I'm gonna pass on the darton and call Arvid instead


The Darton was an older model. Not a new one. It was just I needed somethng to use to compare glass limbs to the carbon ones.


----------



## newell38

I hear yA.


----------



## kegan

Ignoring everything else in this thread (because I'm not interested) using an older glass and wood recurve to compare to a new carbon and foam limb of two totally different designs doesn't work out all that well. At 150 fps that recurve is SLOW. A side by side comparison of two same design, high performance bows would be better. Heck, I can get better speed than the Darton with my glass and wood Omega. It isn't the material making the difference.

A good test to compare the results of carbon would be a glass Centaur versus a double or triple carbon Centaur.


----------



## stoutstuff

Last gen to new gen showed a 6% increase in fps (+10?). Not too shabby!
Nick, Was that using the 18" riser? I wonder what difference there is using the shorter risers if any?
Jay


----------



## Matt_Potter

Took ten pages but finally the "Star Method" came up LOL.

Speed is over rated 

Matt


----------



## turbonockguy

kegan said:


> Ignoring everything else in this thread (because I'm not interested) using an older glass and wood recurve to compare to a new carbon and foam limb of two totally different designs doesn't work out all that well. At 150 fps that recurve is SLOW. A side by side comparison of two same design, high performance bows would be better. Heck, I can get better speed than the Darton with my glass and wood Omega. It isn't the material making the difference.
> 
> A good test to compare the results of carbon would be a glass Centaur versus a double or triple carbon Centaur.


I used what I had. also no foam in the Black Swan.


----------



## turbonockguy

stoutstuff said:


> Last gen to new gen showed a 6% increase in fps (+10?). Not too shabby!
> Nick, Was that using the 18" riser? I wonder what difference there is using the shorter risers if any?
> Jay


My riser is 16 inches.


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> In my opinion this does not break the laws of physics ! It cant! Duh!!


There is no opinion in science! Science collects and compares data, and lets the data speak for itself. 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservation_of_energy
"Energy can be neither created nor be destroyed"

It takes a certain amount of energy to draw a bow. The energy the limbs release to the arrow cannot exceed that amount. With a draw force curve, we can calculate how much energy the limbs can store. With the chrono results, we can calculate how much energy is in the arrow. If you divide arrow energy by the limb stored energy, you have the dynamic efficiency. Then the data will tell us if any laws of physics are being broken.

BM


----------



## Stone Bridge

Aronnax, don't go making sense on this thread. It will break your heart.

I'm still wondering how a bow goes from 254fps at 8.5gpp, as was first reported, to 182fps when later shot at 10.0gpp. No bow I own will lose 72fps for having increased total arrow weight that relatively small amount. Must be a proprietary Black Swan thing. Start great and then explode in flames. Seen it before.


----------



## GEREP

Stone Bridge said:


> Seen it before.


Isn't that the truth.

Every bow is "the fastest bow in the world" if you test them right.

KPC


----------



## Aronnax

Stone Bridge said:


> Aronnax, don't go making sense on this thread. It will break your heart.
> 
> I'm still wondering how a bow goes from 254fps at 8.5gpp, as was first reported, to 182fps when later shot at 10.0gpp. No bow I own will lose 72fps for having increased total arrow weight that relatively small amount. Must be a proprietary Black Swan thing. Start great and then explode in flames. Seen it before.


To your point- this is one of the most efficient bows in Blacky's Bow Reports-
http://www.archeryreports.com/index...em/ah-archery-acs-cx-copy.html?category_id=77

86% efficiency, shoots a 9gpp arrow 200fps.
@ 90% it would be 205fps
@ 95% it would be 210fps
@ 100% it would only be 215fps.

If you invented zero hysteresis, zero mass limbs, and a zero mass string, and fired it in a vacuum, you only stand to gain 15fps. Are we at the point of diminishing returns yet? I think so. The only way to get more speed is to store more energy, like the border limbs. And that has more to do with limb geometry than material science. 

BM


----------



## kegan

turbonockguy said:


> I used what I had. also no foam in the Black Swan.


My point was that design is a bigger contributor to performance than materials.


----------



## MrSinister

kegan said:


> Ignoring everything else in this thread (because I'm not interested) using an older glass and wood recurve to compare to a new carbon and foam limb of two totally different designs doesn't work out all that well. At 150 fps that recurve is SLOW. A side by side comparison of two same design, high performance bows would be better. Heck, I can get better speed than the Darton with my glass and wood Omega. It isn't the material making the difference.
> 
> A good test to compare the results of carbon would be a glass Centaur versus a double or triple carbon Centaur.


Yup. Gotta know what you are doing before doing these kinds of things.


----------



## turbonockguy

Stone Bridge said:


> Aronnax, don't go making sense on this thread. It will break your heart.
> 
> I'm still wondering how a bow goes from 254fps at 8.5gpp, as was first reported, to 182fps when later shot at 10.0gpp. No bow I own will lose 72fps for having increased total arrow weight that relatively small amount. Must be a proprietary Black Swan thing. Start great and then explode in flames. Seen it before.


One reason is I did not know that the AMO draw point was 2.25 inches back on the arrow . I was drawing the original arrows two inches more than the AMO shot.
You can see that in the video. Two extra inches of draw makes a difference.


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> One reason is I did not know that the AMO draw point was 2.25 inches back on the arrow . I was drawing the original arrows two inches more than the AMO shot.
> You can see that in the video. Two extra inches of draw makes a difference.


I'm not sure you're understanding what the AMO standards are for measuring draw length. It has nothing to do with the arrow. It is found by measuring from the deepest part of the grip to the inside edge of the serving at the nock point and then adding 1.75". I still have a feeling that in the video, you're not actually drawing the bows to a 28" AMO draw length.


----------



## p508

turbonockguy said:


> One reason is I did not know that the AMO draw point was 2.25 inches back on the arrow . I was drawing the original arrows two inches more than the AMO shot.
> You can see that in the video. Two extra inches of draw makes a difference.


I have a 30 inch draw , shoot about 7.5 GPP and only pick up 8-10 fps extra- Does this mean my release is so bad that I'm loosing
at least an extra 60 fps ?


----------



## Stone Bridge

p508 said:


> I have a 30 inch draw , shoot about 7.5 GPP and only pick up 8-10 fps extra- Does this mean my release is so bad that I'm loosing
> at least an extra 60 fps ?


It must be you, p508. LOL 

Turboguy, no bow loses or gains 60-70 fps over a 2" draw length variation. Do you even know how to use a chronograph or tape measure? I'm serious. Nothing you do makes any sense at all.


----------



## JINKSTER

this is still going? :laugh: :chortle:


----------



## Hank D Thoreau

Jinx, I was thinking of something more like the wedding scene in Deerslayer.


----------



## JParanee

Deer hunter  ?


----------



## p508

This thread is starting to remind me of when I was in the first grade in an old school building in Boston that was built around 1900.
The urinal in the boys room was a single opening that ran along the entire wall . We used to have contests to see who could stand
back the furthest and ----------------.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau

JParanee said:


> Deer hunter  ?


Yep, got mixed up with the James Fenimore Cooper book.


----------



## turbonockguy

I found this article last night it was on the Archery Exchange site. I have been told here that 10gpp is the IBO number.
Arvid , who was on the committee that set up these standards told me 9 grains per pound. who should I believe.
So I did some research.
Looks like 9gpp is the number.

I am going to try some shots using the 30 inch draw. I think I have a few uncut shafts somewhere. 
I am doing this for my own satisfaction. I like to do experiments.


AMO VS IBO BOW SPEED

A.M.O.(Archery Manufacturing Organization) and I.B.O. (International Bowhunters Association) both have a method for testing arrow speed from bows and although they are different both can be used to compare equipment for relative speed.

Both of the speed testing standards use a constant drawlength, arrow weight and bow weight to test bowspeed. These are the way the two differ.

A.M.O.

Under this standard the bow being tested will have a maximum pull weight of 60lbs. The arrow will have a grain weight of 540(9 grains of arrow weight per pound of bow weight). The draw length will be set at 30 inches. The chronograph used for measuring the speed will be placed at point blank range for testing.

I.B.O.

Under this standard the bow being tested will have a maximum pull weight of 70lbs. The arrow will have a grain weight of 350(5 grains of arrow weight per pound of bow weight). The draw length will be set at 30 inches. The chronograph used for measuring the speed will be placed at point blank range for testing.

What is important about these two speed ratings is that they are only to be used to compare bows speed tested under the same standard. They should NOT be used to tell you what you will personally shoot for speed. For example lets take an average archer……Bill Bowshooter……..Bill has a 29 inch draw length shoots his bow at 65 lbs and shoots a 455 grain aluminum arrow. In our example neither the A.M.O. or the I.B.O standards will accurately reflect the speed of Bill’s bow. Since Bill is shooting a shorter draw than both standards, shooting an arrow that weighs 7 grains of arrow weight per pound of bow weight, and is shooting 65 lb peak weight he will shoot at a speed very different to either standard.

If we try to make some generalizations about the two different ratings we could say that the I.B.O. speed rating is much faster than most archers could achieve, and conversely the A.M.O. speed rating reflects a speed that is less than what most shooters could achieve with the same bow. If a bows I.B.O. speed rating is 320fps and its A.M.O. speed rating is 245fps that would mean the average archer would shoot that bow somewhere in the middle of that range.


----------



## Sanford

Turbonockguy, why not just look at the difference between the two methods and use some basic judgement based on archery experience?

The difference between the two is 90% in grains per pound - that's almost doubling the arrow weight.

The difference between the two is 16% more draw weight and towards the one with the lighter gpp.

This comparison is like night and day, but you need to get thereabouts with a couple of inches of draw. You really don't need to test this in my opinion.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

SANFORD RIGHT! Besides your new bow may not be built for 30" draw. Were as its being overdrawn. Those spec you listed was for compounds. The Manufacture should have given you the spec for that bow. It written on the bottom limb. Most will state draw weight at 28" draw length within a plus or minus BH. 

If you do a Draw Force Curve that will tell what the sweet spot to Test. Measurements taken from the back of the grip (not the arrow) and if we know the fulcrum then someone like Hank can run the data. Dan


----------



## Sanford

You know, I have never gotten involved much in a Black Swan debate, at least, not in an archery forum. But, I have always found the name of the company and the surrounding debates pretty interesting and wonder if much of this is not an intentional matter and welcome by the company. Just seems too fitting to not be part of the game.

Black Swan is a very specific reference in statistics and finance and has it's roots in the theory that all swans were once white, at least, all known swans were once white. Later, someone found a black variety in a remote area of Australia, so, that fact was broken. It's now a term to refer to something that happens outside of statistical distribution calculation - something out of the blue no body saw coming or could statistically predict.

I can't help but notice Turbonockguy's signature line and see the reference as well.

Anyway, not knocking anyone and just making a fun observation in a debate that seems to never end but has such a simple solution. Shoot the bow and see what it does. If it's a super bow above and beyond other bows, it will tell you. The minutia is just confusing fodder.

While I firmly believe in Black Swans, statistical anomalies, on the other hand, if you are holding a White Swan, it ain't a black one.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Matt's right too. Speed in overrated. I see this as my son's motocross were you measure and adjust until you get the rebound, preload and dampening just right for the rider, course and speed of travel.
Dan


----------



## Rick Barbee

Hey Nick.

When testing & comparing one bow to another the testing parameters for your own purposes are irrelevant,
as long as you use those sets of parameters for every bow. Then & only then do you get an accurate & fair representation.

Here are the parameters I suggest for doing your testing, *AND* what I also wish were the industry standards for Trad Bow testing.









With this I am out. 

Y'all have fun, and try not to chew each other up to much. 

Rick


----------



## turbonockguy

Arvid just did some chrono work with the new limbs and is also doing a video. He just forwarded a Graph that was developed at Hewitt Packard that show projected speeds base on putting in data from one shot. so you can see what speeds would be achieved at different grain weights..








The 10 grain per pound is the actual shot he took . He is also shooting a video of the test. He is way more experienced in doing this. 
So I think I will change what I am going to do and just go outdoors and shoot through my chrono to verify what happened indoors.








I also want to thank Rick Barbee for his Advice. I will adhere to his suggestions in future testing.


----------



## turbonockguy

looks like 191 fps @ 47 lbs & 28 inch draw.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> looks like 191 fps @ 47 lbs & 28 inch draw.


That's more of Arvid's way of misleading folks by ommission. No, he said the bow was AMO 47#@ 28", remember, he "was on the committee", so he should know AMO draw testing is not 28".

Furthermore, that's not Hewlet Packard anything. That's a simple Excel graph with "given" velocity, arrow weight, and ft-pounds showing. All Arvid did was follow the line from his starting point. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know he traced over "stated, given" velocities of the graph instead of actual measured ones. IOW, he used data that did not exist.

Look, I have laid out of this, but this is ridiculous. Snake Oil shows of the turn of century couldn't get as misleading as what's going on here. If it was just you mulling around in it, OK. BS is now feeding this made up crap through you as a paid sponsor.


----------



## patrick2cents

that graph shows a constant efficiency from very heavy to very light. Efficiency drops like a rock as you get super light and is one of the big reasons recurves tend to shoot heavy arrows... those data points don't mean anything without testing them (and I guarantee your speeds will be substantially lower as you go to lighter and lighter arrows).


----------



## patrick2cents

Sanford said:


> That's more of Arvid's way of misleading folks. No, he said the bow was AMO 47#@ 28", remember, he "was on the committee", so he knows AMO draw testing is not 28".
> 
> Furthermore, that's not Hewlet Packard anything. That's a simple Excel graph with "given" velocity, arrow weight, and ft-pounds showing. All Arvid did was follow the line from his starting point. *It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know he traced over "state, given" velocities of the graph instead of actual measured ones*. IOW, he used data that did not exist.
> 
> Look, I have laid out of this, but this is ridiculous. Snake Oil shows of the turn of century couldn't get as misleading as what's going on here. If it was just you mulling around in it, OK. BS is now feeding this made up crap through you as a paid sponsor.


I chuckled at this as I was writing back at the same time you were.... I'm an Aerospace Engineer by trade (aka a rocket scientist....). The good news is, according to that chart, my Omega longbow aught to chuck a 200 grain arrow at over 320 fps! (eye roll...)

edit: it may have been "developed" on a Hewlett Packard home printer....


----------



## Aronnax

I would just like to point out that it'll never achieve those speeds at 5gpp. By that logic a 1gpp arrow should do 600fps. Your curves assume a constant dynamic efficiency. As you go down in gpp, you lose efficiency. The more you go down in gpp, the faster you lose efficiency (probably an exponential curve). Things like limb mass, string mass, and limb hysteresis, etc., would determine what the efficiency curve would look like. A bow can never shoot an arrow faster than its dry fire speed.


BM

edit- patrick, sanford, you guys beat me to it...


----------



## Sanford

patrick2cents said:


> edit: it may have been "developed" on a Hewlett Packard home printer....


 Well, BS did get 11 pages about his bows. He probably cares not what you think of him, just be dumb enough to buy past the first page of 300fps and buy a bow.


----------



## Aronnax

Sanford said:


> Well, BS did get 11 pages about his bows. He probably cares not what you think of him, just be dumb enough to buy past the first page of 300fps and buy a bow.


11 pages and still no dfc.

BM


----------



## GEREP

I'm all for precise, independent testing under consistent parameters.

I just hope the next time anyone posts their performance claims, especially those who stand to gain from them, are scrutinized as thoroughly and extensively as Nick's have been.

Let's hope we are setting a new standard for such claims.

KPC


----------



## Stone Bridge

I have a Hewlett Packard home 3D printer. Gonna print up a clone of the BS (and I mean BS) recurve with my new carbon ink cartridge. 

Back later with results. Need to run some stuff by Arvid and Nick. You know, get it right the first time.


----------



## Stone Bridge

Aronnax said:


> 11 pages and still no dfc.
> 
> BM


No apology, either.


----------



## fentiger

If speed is overrated where is the too fast line? If you score better with limbs that some call too fast or the arrow too light should you re-examine your form? 

Kudos to recurve bowyers who are pushing the speed envelope. Reliable stats on performance would help the rest is subjective. For many compounds have gone from fast and user unfriendly to faster and fun to shoot. 

Looking for an 80yd point on with a 1.75" 10yd crawl using MY existing side "C" face anchor [no Oly chin support] and 7gpp. Anybody care to guess speed required?


----------



## Sanford

Aronnax said:


> 11 pages and still no dfc.
> 
> BM


Yes, and to some folks this type of misleading data and reporting, whoever is doing it, is part of the game. Why? Big companies walk that same line daily - it's expected marketing. To me, that's fine, but at some point, we can cross that line. Then, to me, there's not a nickels worth of difference between a pick-pocket and a snake oil sale. Both are theft. As blunt as Stone Bridge was about this, saying nothing when you see it going on is worse.


----------



## patrick2cents

yeah I kind of gave it a pass the first time as perhaps ignorance, or an improper test.... but to claim that extrapolated "speeds" are test data is crazy dishonest/misleading.


----------



## Stone Bridge

fentiger said:


> If speed is overrated where is the too fast line? If you score better with limbs that some call too fast or the arrow too light should you re-examine your form?
> 
> Kudos to recurve bowyers who are pushing the speed envelope. Reliable stats on performance would help the rest is subjective. For many compounds have gone from fast and user unfriendly to faster and fun to shoot.
> 
> Looking for an 80yd point on with a 1.75" 10yd crawl using MY existing side "C" face anchor [no Oly chin support] and 7gpp. Anybody care to guess speed required?


Fent, I think most people in the archery industry who have some grasp on reality understand limbs today are about as efficient as they are ever going to get. Border might be the top today. There probably isn't 10% more speed to be had. I doubt there is that much left to pursue. We will probably never see recurve bows drawn to 28" and shooting even light 6.0 gpp approaching 240 fps. I draw 27". Have shot 6.2 gpp with Border Hex 6 limbs. Only limbs I ever shot that averaged over 200 fps for me. (206 fps) To pull those limbs one more inch and get a full 28 inches might have yielded 215fps at best. That's a long way from 240 fps. It's lightyears away from the numbers Nick first told us he was getting with his Bull &hit bow. 

There are no magic limbs, and there never has been, or will be.


----------



## patrick2cents

Stone Bridge said:


> Fent, I think most people in the archery industry who have some grasp on reality understand limbs today are about as efficient as they are ever going to get. Border might be the top today. There probably isn't 10% more speed to be had. I doubt there is that much left to pursue. We will probably never see recurve bows drawn to 28" and shooting even light 6.0 gpp approaching 240 fps. I draw 27". Have shot 6.2 gpp with Border Hex 6 limbs. Only limbs I ever shot that averaged over 200 fps for me. (206 fps) To pull those limbs one more inch and get a full 28 inches might have yielded 215fps at best. That's a long way from 240 fps. It's lightyears away from the numbers Nick first told us he was getting with his Bull &hit bow.
> 
> There are no magic limbs, and there never has been, or will be.


And I think even the borders aren't a huge step up in efficiency... I think they mainly get a little more performance by being more of a "reflex" bow than a "recurve" and storing more energy that way (which has been known about for a while, but composites finally allow you to take advantage of it and maintain efficiency).


----------



## Aronnax

patrick2cents said:


> And I think even the borders aren't a huge step up in efficiency... I think they mainly get a little more performance by being more of a "reflex" bow than a "recurve" and storing more energy that way (which has been known about for a while, but composites finally allow you to take advantage of it and maintain efficiency).


And structural stability. According to all the discussions on another forum (apparently it's "bad form" to mention other forums here??) limbs of conventional construction methods would be unstable and try to invert with that much hook on the limbs.

At the very least Sid posts actual data to support his claims. Pete ward has some testing (which I linked earlier in this thread) and using his data I found that Border efficiency is basically on par with other high end limbs. I'm still waiting for Blacky Swarz to do his writeup on Border's latest limbs.

BTW, here's a graph I did, and no, I don't work at HP. Though we also have HP printers (doesn't everyone?) this was done on a dell-









BM


----------



## grantmac

I think it all comes back to if you don't know enough to dismiss impossible data then perhaps you should not be posting results.

I personally have hand shot limbs at 218fps with my 28.5". Other than a really nice number they just didn't preform well in terms of accuracy. All my best shooting set ups have been under 210fps.

Grant


----------



## Sanford

patrick2cents said:


> yeah I kind of gave it a pass the first time as perhaps ignorance, or an improper test.... but to claim that extrapolated "speeds" are test data is crazy dishonest/misleading.


It's a 3 dimensional graphing of speed, arrow weight, and energy - that's what it graphs, a line of the relationship of the 3 together. By tracing or following the line of the graph for a speed reading, something totally meaningless was done. It would be like graphing the price of eggs over time and then drawing a line over it and saying "see how the price of coffee in moving". Wasn't even a rookie mistake in reading an Excel graph, as the one providing it made it.

The real LIE was saying it was created using some HP software that could extrapolate the new line. That was intentional. If turbonock didn't realize he was being used to patsy the info, he should seek new friends.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> That's more of Arvid's way of misleading folks by ommission. No, he said the bow was AMO 47#@ 28", remember, he "was on the committee", so he should know AMO draw testing is not 28".
> 
> Furthermore, that's not Hewlet Packard anything. That's a simple Excel graph with "given" velocity, arrow weight, and ft-pounds showing. All Arvid did was follow the line from his starting point. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know he traced over "stated, given" velocities of the graph instead of actual measured ones. IOW, he used data that did not exist.
> 
> Look, I have laid out of this, but this is ridiculous. Snake Oil shows of the turn of century couldn't get as misleading as what's going on here. If it was just you mulling around in it, OK. BS is now feeding this made up crap through you as a paid sponsor.


I think Arvid even has 28 inches on the chart. He also stated he hand shot these. I do not think he can draw 30 inches. If you look at the speed of 191 @ 28 inches
Would it not have been better to show what 30 inches would do. I think it would be doing about 10 fps faster? That would be over 200 fps.
I am not a paid sponsor.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> It's a 3 dimensional graphing of speed, arrow weight, and energy - that's what it graphs, a line of the relationship of the 3 together. By tracing or following the line of the graph for a speed reading, something totally meaningless was done. It would be like graphing the price of eggs over time and then drawing a line over it and saying "see how the price of coffee in moving". Wasn't even a rookie mistake in reading an Excel graph, as the one providing it made it.
> 
> The real LIE was saying it was created using some HP software that could extrapolate the new line. That was intentional. If turbonock didn't realize he was being used to patsy the info, he should seek new friends.


It was not hp software. It was a phd in math, a phd in physics, and Arvid. who all worked at HP.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> It was not hp software. It was a phd in math, a phd in physics, and Arvid. who all worked at HP.


There was not ANY software that made that line, only someone drawing it in.


----------



## Aronnax

Sanford said:


> There was not ANY software that made that line, only someone drawing it in.


And it doesn't take a phd to figure out - v = sqrt(450800*ke/weight)

Now, what would be a fun exercise would be to test a bow with 4 or 5 different gpp arrows and try to extrapolate what the efficiency curve would be. Then try to estimate within some degree of accuracy (state your estimated +/- error) the velocity of hypothetical arrows.

BM


----------



## Huntinsker

So he came up with that chart by taking 1 hand shot arrow and entering the data? He didn't even do an average of 3? A 10 shot average would have been even better yet but using a single shot as the data set is not good testing protocol.


----------



## ranchoarcher

Not a rocket scientist but seems to me that as the weight of the arrow goes down the efficiency drops and so too would the KE. Meaning, a 10gpp single point of data ain't gonna cut it. Looked at the ATA (formerly AMO) web site and Ardvil isn't listed on the committee. Their mug shots. http://www.archerytrade.org/about/board


----------



## Stone Bridge

turbonockguy said:


> I think Arvid even has 28 inches on the chart. He also stated he hand shot these. I do not think he can draw 30 inches. If you look at the speed of 191 @ 28 inches
> Would it not have been better to show what 30 inches would do. I think it would be doing about 10 fps faster? That would be over 200 fps.
> I am not a paid sponsor.


Now look where you have finally backed up to: You're now telling us your magic bow pulled a full 30 inches might shoot 200fps and you're proud of that? What happened to 254fps? What happened to 240, 230, 220, 210? You keep backing up. Now your bow might shoot 200 feet at a full 30 inches and we are supposed to not notice what's been happening? Your bow is mediocre at best. I've seen hybrid longbows of glass and wood approach 200 fps @ 30 inches of draw. Some, no doubt, can shoot that fast at 30".

You really ought to give it up. You keep looking more foolish with each page.


----------



## Easykeeper

To me it looks the chart posted just looks like a graph generated by using the kinetic energy equation (0.5mv[SUP]2[/SUP]) and curves for every 5ft.lbs. of energy. In other words, an accurate but purely mathematical representation. 

Like others have stated, since efficiency varies as arrow weight varies, I don't think the chart would have any prediction accuracy, it's just a simple way of knowing the KE of a particular shot. The chart just lets you skip crunching the numbers and is easily generated in excel or several other programs I can think of. It's also the same chart as on the Black Swan website. There's nothing wrong with the chart itself, but you have to have an actual measured velocity at each arrow weight to use it with any accuracy and then it doesn't tell you anything the equation for KE doesn't.

The 470 grain arrow from the 47# bow using the arrow velocity stated does give something similar to what the chart shows, I get just over 38 ft.lbs.


----------



## turbonockguy

Stone Bridge said:


> Now look where you have finally backed up to: You're now telling us your magic bow pulled a full 30 inches might shoot 200fps and you're proud of that? What happened to 254fps? What happened to 240, 230, 220, 210? You keep backing up. Now your bow might shoot 200 feet at a full 30 inches and we are supposed to not notice what's been happening? Your bow is mediocre at best. I've seen hybrid longbows of glass and wood approach 200 fps @ 30 inches of draw. Some, no doubt, can shoot that fast at 30".
> 
> You really ought to give it up. You keep looking more foolish with each page.


I am going to do a 30 Inch AMO test tomorrow. I have learned a good deal about testing to AMO specs from this post. My original tests I just shot some arrows of the same weight and shot from different bows. The speeds I got were Accurate and showed that the carbon limb bow was out performing a glass limb bow of higher poundage.
I really did not need Amo specs to prove that. 

Thanks to those who would rather help than deride someone. I will try to give them and those like you the best test I can do.
Perhaps you will also benefit from their actions of kindness.

I do not know you except from your posts here . and you do not know me. yet you have called me some pretty bad things and made claims that are totally unfounded .

for what it is worth . I assure you I started this post because I thought the test I did was interesting.and even though it was not AMO specs the results,were accurate. 
the speed changes were also accurate . different weight arrows, different draw lengths produce different speeds. i think you know better.

I am not a shill. I am not paid by Black Swan. I do shoot A Black Swan and have one with the new limbs. Again. I am a "honorary staff shooter" as a result of a friendship I developed with Arvid , as a result of some of his shooters doing quite well with my 'silly Turbonocks" as you called them.

I do not get angry at people who behave like you. It does make me sad. that you choose to communicate in the manner that you do.


----------



## JINKSTER

The most valuable thing I learned from this thread was witnessing an increase of 3fps by replacing the turbonocked arrow with a standard nock.

and there is no emoticon for that.


----------



## gnome

JINKSTER said:


> The most valuable thing I learned from this thread was witnessing an increase of 3fps by replacing the turbonocked arrow with a standard nock.
> 
> and there is no emoticon for that.


Yes there is......:deadhorse


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> The most valuable thing I learned from this thread was witnessing an increase of 3fps by replacing the turbonocked arrow with a standard nock.
> 
> and there is no emoticon for that.


Wisdom is understanding and accepting that often times you are not yet old enough or wise enough to fully understand


----------



## JINKSTER

turbonockguy said:


> Wisdom is understanding and accepting that often times you are not yet old enough or wise enough to fully understand


So Nick?...your response was to copy and paste my tagline?....okay...brilliant...and presuming turn about is fair play...here's yours....

*"Black Swan Archery Staff Shooter"*


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> So Nick?...your response was to copy and paste my tagline?....okay...brilliant...and presuming turn about is fair play...here's yours....
> 
> *"Black Swan Archery Staff Shooter"*


I posted all of yours.

here is my entire signature.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Are there any slow motion videos comparing a turbonock and a traditional nock coming off the string?


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> yet somehow I figured out how to put rifling on arrows ( some call it a gimmick)


Thats a pretty bold statement considering fletched arrows already spin on an axis when shot without turbo nocks.


----------



## Huntinsker

Tradbow Guy said:


> Are there any slow motion videos comparing a turbonock and a traditional nock coming off the string?


Oh god, you don't want to get into that whole thing on here. Just youtube turbonock and you'll find them.


----------



## Icelander513

turbonockguy said:


> My original tests I just shot some arrows of the same weight and shot from different bows. The speeds I got were Accurate and showed that the carbon limb bow was out performing a glass limb bow of higher poundage.


Just for some clarification, are you suggesting that the results of your first "test" (video: page 1, post 1) were "accurate?" i.e., 28" arrow at 8.48 gpp getting 252 fps?


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Huntinsker said:


> Oh god, you don't want to get into that whole thing on here. Just youtube turbonock and you'll find them.


Sorry I havent been following this part of the boards for very long and unaware if this is a sore subject. Was just wanting to see the product working. I enjoy evaluating new technologies. When I shot compound I loved FOBS, many called them a gimick but they steered a 3 blade heavy cut on contact broadout out to 40 yards like a field point. The videos on the website just show some penetration tests.


----------



## screamingeagle

I didn't read this entire thread but I owned a black swan bow a couple years ago. It was no faster than any other longbow or recurve I ever shot. Matter of fact, my hex 5's wiped the pants off thing and so do my Morrison max-1's. It shot 178fps at 10grs per pound through my chrono.


----------



## patrick2cents

Tradbow Guy said:


> Sorry I havent been following this part of the boards for very long and unaware if this is a sore subject. Was just wanting to see the product working. I enjoy evaluating new technologies. When I shot compound I loved FOBS, many called them a gimick but they steered a 3 blade heavy cut on contact broadout out to 40 yards like a field point. The videos on the website just show some penetration tests.


turbonocks actually do seem to help (for me) with BH flight. Nothing replaces tuning, but they do a good job of helping steer a Zwickey with 3" feathers out of my bows... I was impressed.


----------



## Easykeeper

Tradbow Guy said:


> Sorry I havent been following this part of the boards for very long and unaware if this is a sore subject. Was just wanting to see the product working. I enjoy evaluating new technologies. When I shot compound I loved FOBS, many called them a gimick but they steered a 3 blade heavy cut on contact broadout out to 40 yards like a field point. The videos on the website just show some penetration tests.


Here's a recent thread...http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2219804&highlight=turbonock


----------



## turbonockguy

Tradbow Guy said:


> Thats a pretty bold statement considering fletched arrows already spin on an axis when shot without turbo nocks.


YOu are correct. a conventional fletchd arrow using wind resistance and a 2 degree offset will rotate your arrow about 2 times in 20 yds. The turbonock with the twist in the nock will rotate the arrow mechanically 2 times in the first five feet of flight. As a result of that initial spin you can reduce the size of the fletching you are using. This in turn reduces wind resistance for the entire flight of the arrow. With a compound you can get rotation from 5000 to 7000 rpm depending on your bow speed. A trad bow at 200 fps will generate around 4000 rpm. That still makes a mean cutting machine.







Alan is a two time emmy award winning videographer. He knows very little about archery. 
The first time I went to the Ata show .about 12 years ago. Pete Shepley showed interest in my nocks and asked to test them. They did and their engineers gave me the data. 2 revolutions in the first five feet of flight. They would not release the video. So for a good many years folks on this site chose not to believe that "outragious" claim.
It cost about $7000 to $10,000 an hour to have a professional like Alan work for. you.
He had never videoed arrows in flight and had some interest so we worked out a deal.
Look carefully at the turbo an then at the conventional nocked arrow. identical arrows!!


----------



## turbonockguy

Huntinsker said:


> Oh god, you don't want to get into that whole thing on here. Just youtube turbonock and you'll find them.


yes!




If you go to you tube and type in Alan Teitel. then click on his videos you will see several more. shooting through gel.
Alan is a two time emmy award winning videographer. He knows very little about archery but a lot about good video.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> yes!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you go to you tube and type in Alan Teitel. then click on his videos you will see several more. shooting through gel.
> Alan is a two time emmy award winning videographer. He knows very little about archery but a lot about good video.


Are both arrows fletched equally? Im only asking because the turbo nock arrow almost looks like a helical fletch and the non turbo nock looks strait fletch. Not trying to accuse you of anything, just asking.


----------



## turbonockguy

Identical arrows!!!
pause the video and look carefully!!

I do not make a practice of deceiving people. for 12 years no one basically would believe. Since posting this video done by a very reputable videographer. I had hoped to convince more people. This guy has a reputation to maintain also.'
as was very exacting in doing the shots properly. He has done slomo for the discovery channel. the Olympics.
My on line sales have increased since posting this slomo.

But on this site. even with hard evidence it is an up hill battle. Watch the reactions to this statement!


----------



## turbonockguy

I want to explain something. This thread is generating amore private messages to me than any in the past.
They are private. but in general a few warn me about bow manufacturers and their claims. but most ask why I even put up with the " crazies" 
Here is why. This thread has had over 8000 hits. only about a dozen or so folks have posted on this thread. the negative outweigh the positive. yet there are valid questions raised and I address them to the best of my abilities.
So this is not about winning or losing but getting those 8000 who hit to think,
Now with The Turbonoks which this thread is not even about until the last couple of posts. My turbonock sales have spiked since this thread started. They have increased every time on of these "discussions " happened,
They increased dramatically when I first posted the slo mo vides.
Since we talking nocks, for the moment. If you buy my nocks and do not like them, you can do two things.
you can just return them. or you can post on AT how horrible they are and return them. Either way I will take them back. I have made this offer dozens of times on AT. Last year I had 2 orders returned.

Again this thread is about something I do not make!! I do not get any comission or funds from Black Swan.
I am a friend of Arvid. I like him and I like how he thinks.
He Sent me the new limbs to try. I have been using the Chronograph for 14 years. I know how to work it to get accurate results. until this thread I never tested anything to AMO,IBO,FITA,AAA,AFLCIO,NFL,NBA or any standards.
I did experiments mostly with my nocks.and would use identical control arrows with fletching and compare to arrows with turbonocks. same bow same arrows different nocks. and got good data.
I have learned a good deal about AMO Standards and today will try some video with a 30 inch arrow and all the weights correct.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> Identical arrows!!!
> pause the video and look carefully!!
> 
> I do not make a practice of deceiving people. for 12 years no one basically would believe. Since posting this video done by a very reputable videographer. I had hoped to convince more people. This guy has a reputation to maintain also.'
> as was very exacting in doing the shots properly. He has done slomo for the discovery channel. the Olympics.
> My on line sales have increased since posting this slomo.
> 
> But on this site. even with hard evidence it is an up hill battle. Watch the reactions to this statement!


Just making sure not trying to call foul but I dont know til I ask thanks for the clarification. I can tell you for sure however that my arrow spins many many more times then 2 rotations at 20 yards.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> So this is not about winning or losing but getting those 8000 who hit to think,.


It should be about the truth and not faked graphs, but, that's not how things get sold, I guess.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> It should be about the truth and not faked graphs, but, that's not how things get sold, I guess.


like I said ! "watch the reactions"
Yes I have a nock business. I sell nocks by communicating . OH so now the graphs are faked.??
Here we go again.


----------



## Sanford

Edit fell below.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> like I said ! "watch the reactions"
> Yes I have a nock business. I sell nocks by communicating . OH so now the graphs are faked.??
> Here we go again.


Sorry about not clarifying, Turbo, I was still on the topic of this thread, 250 fps recurve limbs. The graph that BS faked. I have no opinions on turbonocks, as I have never been around them. See, I took you at your word that this thread was about something YOU did not make.


----------



## p508

turbonockguy said:


> I want to explain something. This thread is generating amore private messages to me than any in the past.
> Now with The Turbonoks which this thread is not even about until the last couple of posts. My turbonock sales have spiked since this thread started. They have increased every time on of these "discussions " happened,
> 
> Might be intersting to see how many hits Black Swan has had since this thread started- and it's affect on bow sales.
> 
> Turbo guy- I think part of the reason a thread like this won't hurt your sales is that you show yourself to be a very decent person who wants to do the right thing. I'm
> amazed at the way you can accept all the brickbats without becoming emotional or nasty over it . You have won me over.


----------



## patrick2cents

Yeah this thread has impressed me with Nick (again), and made me decide to never buy a Black Swan bow at the same time....


----------



## p508

patrick2cents said:


> Yeah this thread has impressed me with Nick (again), and made me decide to never buy a Black Swan bow at the same time....


I checked Black Swans website- it's like the Truth in Advertising laws don't apply to the internet


----------



## grantmac

I don't care if you draw 32" an 8.5gpp arrow isn't going through the chrono at 250fps from that recurve or any other.

There is one thing to get bad data, another to post it without taking a moment to really discover if it was possible and a third to defend it even when it's be proven to be impossible.

-Grant


----------



## turbonockguy

p508 said:


> turbonockguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> I want to explain something. This thread is generating amore private messages to me than any in the past.
> Now with The Turbonoks which this thread is not even about until the last couple of posts. My turbonock sales have spiked since this thread started. They have increased every time on of these "discussions " happened,
> 
> Might be intersting to see how many hits Black Swan has had since this thread started- and it's affect on bow sales.
> 
> Turbo guy- I think part of the reason a thread like this won't hurt your sales is that you show yourself to be a very decent person who wants to do the right thing. I'm
> amazed at the way you can accept all the brickbats without becoming emotional or nasty over it . You have won me over.
> 
> 
> 
> Thank You..
> This is not about winning you over but I do appreciate the comment. I grew up in this sport My first torunament was 1953 at age 5. As a kid I met Fred Bear, I shot beside Howard Hill.Had a very close relationship with my father. all do to this sport. Back then My dad would call archery a gentleman's sport. He had been a boxer. The sport as it exists today is certainly not that! At least here on Archery Talk. I have been in 1500 tournament martial arts fights. I only lost my temper two times and got disqualified both times. I lost control and drew blood . I was not proud of those and kept my fighting career clean In 1498 tournament fights.
> I learned not to get angry even when judges were being political in the ring. I was usually the only Kung Fu fighter most in Pa. were Karate.
> My best friend outside the ring was my worst enemy in the ring. We fought in championship rounds 8 times I took 5 of them. but we kept track after the fights and figured we were dead even. My last championship win was against him. He was suffering from prostate cancer and this was to be his last fight.
> He warned me to show no pity in the ring. In my first fight I broke my hand, and quietly set it during the fight. My friend Mike saw what happened and had his wife get me an ace bandage between fights. I wrapped it up and told Mike Show me no pity. We went at each other it was brutal and fun.I managed to squeak past him by one point. I miss him. Enemies who were best friends.
> 
> I wish in some way I could help get this sport back on track. Where if a father came here to find out about it he would not turn away in disgust.
> 
> Perhaps if more of those 8000 who do not post would consider posting. I would hope they could change the atmosphere here.
> 
> I totally accept criticism and try to improve myself if I deem it valid. I try not to be rude to those who are rude to me. I will challenge others who I disagree with.
> And then there are the crazies! ya just got to let them slide. perhaps they will learn.
> 
> one more thing and I am done.
> 
> In 1958 my dad was shooting bowman class for about a year. The league championships were at our club in Hummelstown Pa.
> He had a really good day and actually shot up into the Expert B division with his score. After the awards presentation the second place bowman got in my dads face and called him a sandbagger. and was quite unpleasant verbally. My dad was 511 ,200 lbs arms like Popeye. I watched him just stand there looking down at the guy. After he was done my dad smiled at him reached out and grabbed his had with both of his and shook his hand and turned and walked away. I have his trophy at my desk. It goes where I go as he does.
> 
> I have the AMO shooting done and will post as soon as I get it uploaded.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The guy in the suit is my dad,James Snook. When he was on detached service at the Air Base in Thule Greenland 1952,he started an archery club in one of the hangers.
> As far as I know it is still being used. He spent a good bit of the winter rebuilding a wrecked C-124 globemaster. He was an aeronautical engineer, Pilot, Archer ,DaD!
Click to expand...


----------



## steve morley

turbonockguy said:


> p508 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I totally accept criticism and try to improve myself if I deem it valid. I try not to be rude to those who are rude to me.
> 
> 
> 
> Turbonock has taken some flack and some posters have been quite rude, it's only Archery and not the end of the world
> 
> The man has remained calm and polite, maybe those dishing out the abuse should take a leaf out of his book, it will be more constructive in the long run.
Click to expand...


----------



## turbonockguy

steve morley said:


> turbonockguy said:
> 
> 
> 
> Turbonock has taken some flack and some posters have been quite rude, it's only Archery and not the end of the world
> 
> The man has remained calm and polite, maybe those dishing out the abuse should take a leaf out of his book, it will be more constructive in the long run.
> 
> 
> 
> WOW! Thank You!
Click to expand...


----------



## turbonockguy

While I am waiting for the video to upload . ( I have the flack vest and crash helmet ready) I have been going over why I still love this sport.
The above is my first Archery tournament, I am the kid on the right.with my Ben Pearson 25 lb at 22 inches?? speed. 1000fps! 
The big guy behind me is my dad. 








This is a cool photo. Our archery club was near Olmsted AFB (now Harrisburg International) We had a lot of Air Force guys in the club.
This photo shows the first time any of us saw camo. My dad is the guy on the right . the guy in camo If I remember ,was John Vogle. That was camo he got in the military. So we took a photo to see how it looked in the woods.


----------



## turbonockguy

This is Fred's Bear, I think I was 10 or 11. We went to Harrisburg Sports show. They were advertising Fred and the Bear would be there. I had seen the 16mm movie at our Archery Club. We got in the north Hall and headed over to Kinseys Archery Booth. where the Bear was. My dad went Over to see Vern Kinsey and some others and I headed straight to that bear! I was standing in front of it trying to imagine what it would be like. I started sticking my arm out an pretended to draw down on it.
Someone came up behind me and asked what I thought of the bear. I did not take my eyes off the bear and answered. I wonder where he shot it?
Then Fred walked in front of me and pointed to the spot. I just looked at him and said nothing . and quickly walked over to my dad and tried to become invisible.
Fred came over and talked to all the people standing at Kinseys stand. I just stared at him. He was not very big and looked quite old, especially to an 11 year old.
He did smile at me once or twice. when he was talking to my dad.

Memories like that keep me in this sport.


----------



## turbonockguy

*49 lb 490 grain arrow 30 inches.*






Ok !! I am ready. This is the best I can do.
I want to thank Rick Barbee for the help. I tried to do it as exact as I could.


----------



## Bowsage

Love my Turbo nocks! since 1995 , have not refletched an arrow since. ( except stickbow arrows)


----------



## grantmac

194fps at 30" DL with 10GPP is a very believable number. Indeed that is on the low-end for the numbers I would expect from a carbon powered limb being shot with fingers, which is usually about 10fps down on ones being shot with a release.

I think what would go a long way towards restoring some credibility would be acknowledging that your initial numbers were false.

-Grant


----------



## Stone Bridge

192fps at 30" is doggish at best. The good news is it sounds about right. First honest report on the Black Swan in the whole thread. Bad new is, I've seen self-bows approach that speed.


----------



## ismo131

We in Europe think and do addwedicing differently than you Americans. Here we say that "this is a good bow, buy it from us". 
American say "World best bow with ultimate lightning speed. Be number 1 be worlds best with this __________bow!


----------



## patrick2cents

That would be one heck of a self bow! I think that's a reasonably quick bow,though it isn't exactly revolutionary.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

ismo131 said:


> We in Europe think and do addwedicing differently than you Americans. Here we say that "this is a good bow, buy it from us".
> American say "World best bow with ultimate lightning speed. Be number 1 be worlds best with this __________bow!


Lol, Americans love to be told what they want to hear. I wont lie about that.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Bowsage said:


> Love my Turbo nocks! since 1995 , have not refletched an arrow since. ( except stickbow arrows)


How did they stop you from having to refletch?


----------



## turbonockguy

Tradbow Guy said:


> How did they stop you from having to refletch?


We also make turbonock with the fletching as part of the nock. not good for trad. requires a fallaway rest or a whisker.
you can see them if you want at. www.turbonockfactorysore.com


----------



## turbonockguy

grantmac said:


> 194fps at 30" DL with 10GPP is a very believable number. Indeed that is on the low-end for the numbers I would expect from a carbon powered limb being shot with fingers, which is usually about 10fps down on ones being shot with a release.
> 
> I think what would go a long way towards restoring some credibility would be acknowledging that your initial numbers were false.
> 
> -Grant


What made my initial numbers higher was not that they were false. I was not drawing the bow to AMO Standards. Instead of drawing to a point 1.75 behind the tip of the arrow. I was bringing the back of the tip to the plunger. That was the reference point for all the shots in that test. IT was not AMO, but the speed was what it was.

I was doing an experiment to see how the higher poundage glass bow compared to the lower poundage carbon ceramic. 
What is important at least to me. was in all the tests I did. the lower poundage bow was more efficient.
As to speed. I think 194 fps AMO for a 49lb bow is pretty good. I have not checked around to see. because I am sure others will.

I did not do an Amo on the glass bow in the last test. I see no reason to do so as a result of the earlier tests.


----------



## GEREP

ismo131 said:


> We in Europe think and do addwedicing differently than you Americans. Here we say that "this is a good bow, buy it from us".
> American say "World best bow with ultimate lightning speed. Be number 1 be worlds best with this __________bow!


Interestingly enough, a European company is currently making some of those types of claims. Lofty performance claims are hardly unique to America.

KPC


----------



## JINKSTER

Okay Nick...I promised myself I would no longer respond too this particular thread but I've followed along and enough is enough...and I'm not talking about "products" here...I'm talking about "you" sir...and it's time for me to get my Christian on here as follows....

I know first hand that the easiest thing in the world to do is sit back and criticize others while often (if not "all") times the toughest thing to do is to be the actual participant who's putting themselves out there for the world to judge as I myself (much like yourself) have spent more time and effort on both sides of that fence than any one person should.

And in the name of......"Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone."....I've most definitely made far more than my fair share of false assumptions...and while caught up in the excitement of what I truly believed to be a moment of personal discovery?....accidentally publicized fallacy as fact...and many times over too the point that I actually acquired a taste for humble pie because each and every time I got served a slice?....ultimately it was pride stinging moment of personal growth with a valuable prize inside...

"A Spike In My Knowledge Base" 

That said?...(and strictly speaking for myself)...I now feel it's high time to stop the bashing and criticizing and "Commend You" for the good things I see in you as follows...

*1. "Your Passion":* is glaringly obvious spending a lifetime drawn too and immersed in the shooting sports and even contributing several archery related products of your own. 

*2. "Your Honesty":* as you readily admitted your initial testing wasn't all it should be.

*3. "Your Open-Mindedness":* You didn't fight the critics..instead?...you listened, learned and?....

*4. "Your Willingness":* "Delivered"

*5. "Your Commitment":* is undeniable...as here you have taken 14 pages worth of a sound butt thrashing yet didn't take your ball and go home...instead?...you hung in there and followed through too the bittersweet end.

And in hindsight?...I just have to applaud those very virtues you have so admirably demonstrated here...which brings to mind a famous quote I have much respect for....

*"“It is not the critic who counts;
not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood;
who strives valiantly;
who errs and comes short again and again;
who knows great enthusiasms,
the great devotions;
who spends himself in a worthy cause;
who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly
so that his place shall never be with those timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”*

So please accept my most profuse apologies and carry on sir...who knows?..I may even run up to Bass Pro for a right wing clamp for my bitz just so I can try out your turbo-nocks...after all...if Rick Barbee endorses such?....then who am I to criticize what I've never even tried? 

Carry on and have a great weekend Nick, L8R, Bill. :cool2:


----------



## gnome

JINKSTER said:


> Okay Nick...I promised myself I would no longer respond too this particular thread but I've followed along and enough is enough...and I'm not talking about "products" here...I'm talking about "you" sir...and it's time for me to get my Christian on here as follows....
> 
> I know first hand that the easiest thing in the world to do is sit back and criticize others while often (if not "all") times the toughest thing to do is to be the actual participant who's putting themselves out there for the world to judge as I myself (much like yourself) have spent more time and effort on both sides of that fence than any one person should.
> 
> And in the name of......"Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone."....I've most definitely made far more than my fair share of false assumptions...and while caught up in the excitement of what I truly believed to be a moment of personal discovery?....accidentally publicized fallacy as fact...and many times over too the point that I actually acquired a taste for humble pie because each and every time I got served a slice?....ultimately it was pride stinging moment of personal growth with a valuable prize inside...
> 
> "A Spike In My Knowledge Base"
> 
> That said?...(and strictly speaking for myself)...I now feel it's high time to stop the bashing and criticizing and "Commend You" for the good things I see in you as follows...
> 
> *1. "Your Passion":* is glaringly obvious spending a lifetime drawn too and immersed in the shooting sports and even contributing several archery related products of your own.
> 
> *2. "Your Honesty":* as you readily admitted your initial testing wasn't all it should be.
> 
> *3. "Your Open-Mindedness":* You didn't fight the critics..instead?...you listened, learned and?....
> 
> *4. "Your Willingness":* "Delivered"
> 
> *5. "Your Commitment":* is undeniable...as here you have taken 14 pages worth of a sound butt thrashing yet didn't take your ball and go home...instead?...you hung in there and followed through too the bittersweet end.
> 
> And in hindsight?...I just have to applaud those very virtues you have so admirably demonstrated here...which brings to mind a famous quote I have much respect for....
> 
> *"“It is not the critic who counts;
> not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
> The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
> whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood;
> who strives valiantly;
> who errs and comes short again and again;
> who knows great enthusiasms,
> the great devotions;
> who spends himself in a worthy cause;
> who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
> and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly
> so that his place shall never be with those timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”*
> 
> So please accept my most profuse apologies and carry on sir...who knows?..I may even run up to Bass Pro for a right wing clamp for my bitz just so I can try out your turbo-nocks...after all...if Rick Barbee endorses such?....then who am I to criticize what I've never even tried?
> 
> Carry on and have a great weekend Nick, L8R, Bill. :cool2:



:amen: Polite debate and discussion, through the exchange of questions and answers, eventually leads to truth. As soon as the personal attacks appear, debate and discussion takes a backseat to this type of exchange, ( only by a few), which leads to this.
Thanks Bill, you always seem to be the one who ends up saying what needs to be said.


----------



## JINKSTER

gnome said:


> :amen: Polite debate and discussion, through the exchange of questions and answers, eventually leads to truth. As soon as the personal attacks appear, debate and discussion takes a backseat to this type of exchange, ( only by a few), which leads to this.
> Thanks Bill, you always seem to be the one who ends up saying what needs to be said.


Thanks gnome but don't give me the credit Bro! :laugh:

Most times?...I'm a baaaaahhhhhhd man! :laugh:

but sometimes?.....God puts it in my heart to fess up and speak up..."HE"...gets the glory...not me...I'm just a humble servant who sometimes remembers that...

"The way up is down".


----------



## BarneySlayer

ismo131 said:


> We in Europe think and do addwedicing differently than you Americans. Here we say that "this is a good bow, buy it from us".
> American say "World best bow with ultimate lightning speed. Be number 1 be worlds best with this __________bow!


When we were in Iceland on a bicycle trip, we met a Hungarian at a Hostel. We camped most of the way, but got drenched and blown around enough that we were glad to have luck into someplace dry and warm. Anyway, we were sharing breakfast and stories, and he remarks about our trail mix, "Interesting. It says that your adventure starts here. Why can't I buy it because it is good and I like it?"

We haven't seen packaging and advertisements the same ever since. It's everywhere.


----------



## olddogrib

Bravo, well spoken Bill! After 14 pages I was waiting for cooler heads to prevail and print something worth an "Amen, brother"! Lotsa folks here need to get their docs to review those Xanax dosages!


----------



## JINKSTER

BarneySlayer said:


> When we were in Iceland on a bicycle trip, we met a Hungarian at a Hostel. We camped most of the way, but got drenched and blown around enough that we were glad to have luck into someplace dry and warm. Anyway, we were sharing breakfast and stories, and he remarks about our trail mix, "Interesting. It says that your adventure starts here. Why can't I buy it because it is good and I like it?"
> 
> We haven't seen packaging and advertisements the same ever since. It's everywhere.


That's Great! :laugh:

Then again?...I've always gotten a laugh out of the Brit who wrote....

*"OH THOSE CRAZY AMERICANS!"

First?...they HEAT their tea to make it HOT...

Then?...they add ICE to make it COLD...

Then they add SUGAR to make it SWEET...

Then add LEMON to make it SOUR....

They BELCH and say "Excuse Me"...

Then FART and LAUGH Like HE11!

Oh Those Crazy Americans!* :laugh: 

and ain't it the truth.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Yep, nick took a bashing last year for his turbonocks and I supported them back then by buying two dozen nock to try out my shelf.
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> Okay Nick...I promised myself I would no longer respond too this particular thread but I've followed along and enough is enough...and I'm not talking about "products" here...I'm talking about "you" sir...and it's time for me to get my Christian on here as follows....
> 
> I know first hand that the easiest thing in the world to do is sit back and criticize others while often (if not "all") times the toughest thing to do is to be the actual participant who's putting themselves out there for the world to judge as I myself (much like yourself) have spent more time and effort on both sides of that fence than any one person should.
> 
> And in the name of......"Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone."....I've most definitely made far more than my fair share of false assumptions...and while caught up in the excitement of what I truly believed to be a moment of personal discovery?....accidentally publicized fallacy as fact...and many times over too the point that I actually acquired a taste for humble pie because each and every time I got served a slice?....ultimately it was pride stinging moment of personal growth with a valuable prize inside...
> 
> "A Spike In My Knowledge Base"
> 
> That said?...(and strictly speaking for myself)...I now feel it's high time to stop the bashing and criticizing and "Commend You" for the good things I see in you as follows...
> 
> *1. "Your Passion":* is glaringly obvious spending a lifetime drawn too and immersed in the shooting sports and even contributing several archery related products of your own.
> 
> *2. "Your Honesty":* as you readily admitted your initial testing wasn't all it should be.
> 
> *3. "Your Open-Mindedness":* You didn't fight the critics..instead?...you listened, learned and?....
> 
> *4. "Your Willingness":* "Delivered"
> 
> *5. "Your Commitment":* is undeniable...as here you have taken 14 pages worth of a sound butt thrashing yet didn't take your ball and go home...instead?...you hung in there and followed through too the bittersweet end.
> 
> And in hindsight?...I just have to applaud those very virtues you have so admirably demonstrated here...which brings to mind a famous quote I have much respect for....
> 
> *"“It is not the critic who counts;
> not the man who points out how the strong man stumbled or where the doer of deeds could have done them better.
> The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena,
> whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood;
> who strives valiantly;
> who errs and comes short again and again;
> who knows great enthusiasms,
> the great devotions;
> who spends himself in a worthy cause;
> who at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement,
> and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly
> so that his place shall never be with those timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.”*
> 
> So please accept my most profuse apologies and carry on sir...who knows?..I may even run up to Bass Pro for a right wing clamp for my bitz just so I can try out your turbo-nocks...after all...if Rick Barbee endorses such?....then who am I to criticize what I've never even tried?
> 
> Carry on and have a great weekend Nick, L8R, Bill. :cool2:


So! Can I reach across that imaginary table and shake hands?


----------



## JINKSTER

turbonockguy said:


> So! Can I reach across that imaginary table and shake hands?


Yes sir you can...and the act would be greeted with a smile...without fear of pulling back a stub! :laugh:

Matter fact?...I'd be my honer Nick.


----------



## Nekekal

Wow, I just read through this whole thing. Talk about mean spirited. I knew that of course from a few postings that I had made before, but mostly it was just mean, rude and ugly. It was like a visit to the flat earth society. It makes me pretty glad that I don't know any of the people posting, nor do I want to.

Have a nice day.


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> Yes sir you can...and the act would be greeted with a smile...without fear of pulling back a stub! :laugh:
> 
> Matter fact?...I'd be my honer Nick.


OK!
This will probably open a new worm can but I did do one extra set of test shots bareshaft with the 490 grain arrow at 30 inches. With a regular nock( I will not name the brand) and it averaged 2 fps faster than the Turbonock.

The reason for that is pretty simple. In order for the turbonock to spin it takes some energy from the launch.
Now here is the kicker. Even though it leaves the bow 2fps slower somehow it out penetrates conventional arrows.

I think the reason is that the conventional arrow may be rotating at about 400 rpms where the turbo even at trad speeds is getting around 4000 rpms. That is stored energy.

Rick Barbee showed it with his cut off broadhead test. 

To Duplicate Ricks test I am going to take the shooting machine outdoors. But that will have to wait until the 0 degree weather changes. An sometimes in this part of NH that can be Easter.
So until then I am going to have some fun just shooting these new limbs. 
I shot 30 minutes last night. 
Today I have to clean the shop. we moved into this new location over a month ago and I still have unpacking to do.


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> OK!
> This will probably open a new worm can but I did do one extra set of test shots bareshaft with the 490 grain arrow at 30 inches. With a regular nock( I will not name the brand) and it *averaged 2 fps faster than the Turbonock*.
> 
> Honesty.....That's good.
> 
> The reason for that is pretty simple. In order for the turbonock to spin it takes some energy from the launch.
> Now here is the kicker. *Even though it leaves the bow 2fps slower somehow it out penetrates conventional arrows.
> 
> I think the reason is that the conventional arrow may be rotating at about 400 rpms where the turbo even at trad speeds is getting around 4000 rpms. That is stored energy*.
> 
> Dang!! Right off the deep end again. Should have stopped when you were ahead.
> 
> Rick Barbee showed it with his cut off broadhead test.
> 
> To Duplicate Ricks test I am going to take the shooting machine outdoors. But that will have to wait until the 0 degree weather changes. An sometimes in this part of NH that can be Easter.
> So until then I am going to have some fun just shooting these new limbs.
> I shot 30 minutes last night.
> Today I have to clean the shop. we moved into this new location over a month ago and I still have unpacking to do.


reply in red


----------



## Stone Bridge

A spinning arrow is expending energy, you idiot, not storing it. God Almighty even a sixth-grade science student knows this.

I can't believe you continue to show just how out of your element you are. And to think others think you're terrific mystifies me.

I cannot believe you said a spinning arrow is stored energy. That's like saying an oil fire is stored energy. If it's on fire, it's expending energy. If an object is spinning, it took energy to get the thing spinning. Energy better used to propel the arrow over the ground in terms of FPS. 

Almost 10K reads on this thing. Not one bit of sense expended by turboguy yet. Or is it "stored" sense? 

No. Couldn't be.


----------



## Easykeeper

turbonockguy said:


> I think the reason is that the conventional arrow may be rotating at about 400 rpms where the turbo even at trad speeds is getting around 4000 rpms. That is stored energy.


How are you determining these values and at what distance is the measurement of angular velocity being made?

Regardless of the initial angular velocity, at some point downrange where the forces balance out, angular velocity is simply a function of arrow velocity and the offset of the fletching.

An arrow launched with an initial angular velocity lower than this equilibrium point will undergo a _positive_ angular acceleration from the forces acting on the fletching due to it's travel through the air; it's rotational speed increases. 

An arrow launched with an initial angular velocity higher than this equilibrium point will undergo a _negative_ angular acceleration from the forces acting on the fletching due to it's travel through the air; it's rotational speed decreases.

If the grooves on a Turbonock are oriented to provide an initial 4000 rpm as the arrow leaves the string, I will postulate that it does not maintain that angular velocity downrange due to the negative angular acceleration it will experience from the fletching. 

A bare shaft however, _would_ maintain the initial angular velocity produced by a Turbonock to a much higher degree since the only forces acting in the rotational direction is friction between the shaft and the air. But, most of us aren't shooting bare shaft except for tuning. 

I'm pretty sure any arrow has to follow the concepts of fluid dynamics and physics, regardless of whether it is equipped with a Turbonock or a regular nock.

So ultimately, at some point downrange where the forces reach equilibrium, there will be no difference in the angular velocity of an arrow due to the style of nock it has on the back end. 

This is my understanding of the general principles involved, please correct me if I'm an wrong.


----------



## p508

This thread was almost on the verge of becoming an ode to Nick and now seems to be headed downhill again . A lot of people seem to be very happy with Turbo Nocks
so there must be something to them. The issue seems to be that Nick doesn't have the science knowledge to properly explain WHY they work thus his explanations are whats really causing the problem . You can create something that will achieve a result without necessarily understanding the mechanics behind it.


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> OK!
> This will probably open a new worm can but I did do one extra set of test shots bareshaft with the 490 grain arrow at 30 inches. With a regular nock( I will not name the brand) and it averaged 2 fps faster than the Turbonock.
> 
> The reason for that is pretty simple. In order for the turbonock to spin it takes some energy from the launch.
> Now here is the kicker. Even though it leaves the bow 2fps slower somehow it out penetrates conventional arrows.
> 
> I think the reason is that the conventional arrow may be rotating at about 400 rpms where the turbo even at trad speeds is getting around 4000 rpms. That is stored energy.
> 
> Rick Barbee showed it with his cut off broadhead test.
> 
> To Duplicate Ricks test I am going to take the shooting machine outdoors. But that will have to wait until the 0 degree weather changes. An sometimes in this part of NH that can be Easter.
> So until then I am going to have some fun just shooting these new limbs.
> I shot 30 minutes last night.
> Today I have to clean the shop. we moved into this new location over a month ago and I still have unpacking to do.


Okay, I'm going to give you a little advice that may help you in your test if you do decide to revisit the penetration tests.

Where I think Rick fell short on his penetration test was that he tuned his bow to shoot the turbonock and then shot some conventional nock arrows side by side the turbonock arrows. We all know that optimal arrow flight increases penetration so it only makes sense that you MUST have optimal arrow flight with both types of nocks in order to test the true penetration potential of one nock over the other. You can even see in Rick's pictures that the turbonock arrows were going into the target nice and straight where the conventional nock arrows were at angles. That right there tells me that they probably weren't tuned perfectly so they scrubbed off energy and lost velocity due to poor flight.

So if you're going to do a test that is both credible and re-creatable, you MUST....

1. Tune the bow/arrow with each nock so that your bareshafts consistently hit with fletched at 20 yards. That's kind of a "tuning standard" that's acceptable for most people.

2. Have arrows of equal weight. If you have to add weight to the conventional arrows, do so at the back of the shaft using tape.

3. Have a consistent test medium. It doesn't have to be soft flesh or ballistics gel but it does have to be a consistent texture and density. Also, have one target per arrow. I would suggest using expandable foam like "Great Stuff" and make all the targets on the same day at the same time to ensure that conditions, like temperature and humidity, are the same. Not that expensive and you should be able to make several targets pretty cheap. An 8" x 8" x 16" box lined with plastic as a mold should make a large enough target to stop the arrows and keep them from blowing out the back. You want to use 1 target for 1 arrow because you don't want there to be the "what if it hits the same hole" question. If you do the test properly, you won't need 10 shots with each. An average of 3-5 GOOD test shots will be enough assuming you've kept things controlled and consistent.

4. DO NOT USE BROADHEADS!! Adding a broadhead will only add one more variable to the test that someone could question, "was it the nock or the broadhead"? Use only field points of the same shape and size so you get a consistent "wound channel" with each arrow.

5. Do not hand shoot the arrows. Use your shooting machine so you can get as consistent of a shot as possible.

6. Perform the tests inside. You'll likely have to do this test on separate days, because of the tuning (unless you tune with both arrows, record the tune and then can immediately replicate it based on measurements and marks on the equipment), so you need a controlled environment so that there is no question if the weather was a factor.

7. Record EVERYTHING in both text and video if you can. If it's not recorded, you may not remember it exactly and if you can't remember it exactly, it's not worth a thing. If it's not recorded, it didn't happen. It would also be great to see, on video immediately before doing the penetration tests, a group with fletched and bareshafts so you can prove that the bow is tuned to each arrow.

8. Obviously, the shooting should be done at the exact same distance with the exact same equipment, minus the nocks, and measurements. This goes without saying but.......just saying.

Since you'd be doing all of this anyway, it would be a good idea to add a chronograph to the mix. Shoot through the chrono at the bow for an average and then shoot through the chrono just in front of the target for an average. If you're worried about hitting the chrono, put a target or piece of plywood directly in front of the electronics so it doesn't get hit. That data would be very interesting as well as beneficial to possibly explain whatever results you get in the penetration test.

This all seems like a lot but that's what scientific testing is. It's a lot of work to PROVE something. If you do the necessary steps and take the necessary care, it's not hard to defend your results and anyone should be able to re-create not only the test parameters but the results as well.


----------



## Stone Bridge

p508 said:


> This thread was almost on the verge of becoming an ode to Nick and now seems to be headed downhill again . A lot of people seem to be very happy with Turbo Nocks
> so there must be something to them. The issue seems to be that Nick doesn't have the science knowledge to properly explain WHY they work thus his explanations are whats really causing the problem . You can create something that will achieve a result without necessarily understanding the mechanics behind it.


There is nothing to them. Believe me, if they were a good idea everybody in the industry would have come up with their own version by now. Patents mean little in the end. Spin-Wings were patented and that didn't stop many imitators. Spin-Wings got copied because they were a breakthrough in arrow fletching. They have been proven in world-class competition and by extensive testing by many archers with no profit to make.

I've been an observer of the competition world for 40 years. Nobody uses turbonocks. Nobody of any note at least. I've never even heard of anyone using them. 

I will admit the idea is not a bad one. But in application it's a solution in search of a problem. I actually apply my Mylar vanes to a degree that reduces rotation somewhat. You can have too much spin. Too much spin puts a lot of drag on an arrow. (too much drag on fletching) All you need is a moderate amount to keep the arrow moving in a straight line. That's all. 

My best groups at all distances have been made with 2" Spin-Wings. From 18 meters to 90 meters. All that varied was the arrow shaft. Three 2" Spin-Wings have less surface area than one 4" feather. You get rotation and retain velocity down range. They also weigh less than a turbo nock and spin arrows to any degree you want by varying the offset. I use them at (about) 2 degrees for 90 meters and about 5 degrees for indoor 18 meters where you want a bit more drag early.

Turbo nocks are not adjustable for rotation rate. You get what you get. You also get more serving wear. You get a cockamamie design that serves no purpose but to hook the uninitiated.


----------



## gnome

Stone Bridge said:


> A spinning arrow is expending energy, you idiot, not storing it. God Almighty even a sixth-grade science student knows this.
> 
> I can't believe you continue to show just how out of your element you are. And to think others think you're terrific mystifies me.
> 
> I cannot believe you said a spinning arrow is stored energy. That's like saying an oil fire is stored energy. If it's on fire, it's expending energy. If an object is spinning, it took energy to get the thing spinning. Energy better used to propel the arrow over the ground in terms of FPS.
> 
> Almost 10K reads on this thing. Not one bit of sense expended by turboguy yet. Or is it "stored" sense?
> 
> No. Couldn't be.[/QUOTE
> 
> You can respond without the "you idiot" kind of comments.
> And have I mentioned that TROLLS live under stone bridges; coincidence? I think not!


----------



## Stone Bridge

Hey, gnome. So you can call me a troll but I can't call the other guy an idiot? That makes you a hypocrite. I'm consistent in my approach but not you. You need to be liked and admired like so many other forum junkies with nothing to contribute but fluff.

I'll have none of that. I can always go watch Oprah when I need a fuzzy feeling.


----------



## Sanford

p508 said:


> The issue seems to be that Nick doesn't have the science knowledge to properly explain WHY they work thus his explanations are whats really causing the problem . You can create something that will achieve a result without necessarily understanding the mechanics behind it.


He's a real smart man. I don't think he's lacking in any department there. Contentious message board threads get a a lot of views - train wreck theory. That's well known and exploitable. Every "plant" statement you find, IOW, wild science claim, comes right about the carefully timed point of entry. How else would one generate thousands of product views otherwise. Think how much air time Black Swan and Turbonocks got just from this one. In six months, there will be another. If the situation were different and the product was selling itself, it would be the other way around - lots of disinterested folks initiating the conversation with a few cranks "trying" to keep their air time. The initial claim of this thread, the 240-250 fps recurve bow ought to have been everyone's first clue that we "cranks" were being called to duty


----------



## gnome

Stone Bridge said:


> Hey, gnome. So you can call me a troll but I can't call the other guy an idiot? That makes you a hypocrite. I'm consistent in my approach but not you. You need to be liked and admired like so many other forum junkies with nothing to contribute but fluff.
> 
> I'll have none of that. I can always go watch Oprah when I need a fuzzy feeling.


If you have an opposing opinion fine, if you disagree, fine, you can express it with respect to the other poster. But when you continually make personal attacks, it adds nothing to the discussion , or this form , and THAT is what makes you a TROLL. And your relentless personal attacks were many,and almost predictable , long before before I called attention to it. So who is the hypocrite?


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Turbonockguy has certainly hung in there and been polite despite a crap ton of abuse taken. He's certainly a calmer person then I am, I give him credit for that at least lol. And he's answered all the questions I have asked. I dont have the physics knowledge to know how or why something like a turbo nock would work. My simple mind would tell me an object spinning faster (like a football with a tight vs a loose spiral) would reduce drag and hit harder, but as stoney brought up, there is also the matter of the fletching creating drag, something that is not in effect with a football. Then one could say, perhaps the spinning somehow helps the broadhead penetrate further upon impact, how? I dont know, conventional wisdom would point to the opposite. I think in short I would love to see a lot more slow motion video and testing done with turbo nocks, this is why I was asking nick earlier if there was any slow motion video. There is the one but its not enough to satisfy my curiosity. I am perhaps a bit to anal about these things. But I think testing is a good thing. If your product works the most footage and testing you have for people to review the better (Nick said himself after the one slow motion video his sales skyrocketed).


----------



## JINKSTER

Stone Bridge said:


> I can always go watch Oprah when I need a fuzzy feeling.


Ahhh....Stone...dang dude...That explains it...Oprah went off air on 09/09/2011...which indicates to me that it's been a little over 3 years since you got your last "fuzzy feeling".

Could I possibly interest you in a group hug? :laugh:


----------



## p508

Sanford said:


> He's a real smart man. I don't think he's lacking in any department there. Contentious message board threads get a a lot of views - train wreck theory. That's well known and exploitable. Every "plant" statement you find, IOW, wild science claim, comes right about the carefully timed point of entry. How else would one generate thousands of product views otherwise. Think how much air time Black Swan and Turbonocks got just from this one. In six months, there will be another. If the situation were different and the product was selling itself, it would be the other way around - lots of disinterested folks initiating the conversation with a few cranks "trying" to keep their air time. The initial claim of this thread, the 240-250 fps recurve bow ought to have been everyone's first clue that we "cranks" were being called to duty


I'm a little slow sometimes- Are you saying he's really the Pied Piper


----------



## Sanford

Tradbow Guy said:


> Turbonockguy has certainly hung in there and been polite despite a crap ton of abuse taken. He's certainly a calmer person then I am, I give him credit for that at least lol. And he's answered all the questions I have asked. I dont have the physics knowledge to know how or why something like a turbo nock would work. My simple mind would tell me an object spinning faster (like a football with a tight vs a loose spiral) would reduce drag and hit harder, but as stoney brought up, there is also the matter of the fletching creating drag, something that is not in effect with a football. Then one could say, perhaps the spinning somehow helps the broadhead penetrate further upon impact, how? I dont know, conventional wisdom would point to the opposite. I think in short I would love to see a lot more slow motion video and testing done with turbo nocks, this is why I was asking nick earlier if there was any slow motion video. There is the one but its not enough to satisfy my curiosity. I am perhaps a bit to anal about these things. But I think testing is a good thing. If your product works the most footage and testing you have for people to review the better (Nick said himself after the one slow motion video his sales skyrocketed).


That really can apply to anything out there. The market doesn't need to know anything about the physics of it to know if it works or not. All they know is that a little spin helps but too much spin hurts - everything in purpose, though. We have slight offset to heavy helical. Helical is slower than offset but some folks find a need for helical. If there's any free lunch out there, as in capturing "extra" energy off the string to compensate for the "extra" spin drag, then the market would be using it whether they understood it or not.


----------



## Sanford

p508 said:


> I'm a little slow sometimes- Are you saying he's really the Pied Piper


All I'm saying is that chains have two ends. When someone is pulling your chain, pulling back is not something one even needs to apologize for. Remember, we still have a 240-250 pfs recurve here. That never went away. He's been around the archery industry all his life, built shooting machines to test equipment, but still falling back on "testing method" ignorance as why this bow still can be what's claimed. With even a small amount of archery knowledge, all one has to do is the math. 250-194 = 56fps. His shafts ain't long enough even if overdrawn to make that difference. He and Arvid only differed by 3 pfs over 2". The whole "testing" thing was just to get numbers to back into that phoney graph and divert from the fact it's just another bow out there - no new revolutionary anything going on. Shoot it at 33" draw, shoot it 34" draw, it won't make the original claim on paper so why not discuss the truth over diversion.


----------



## gnome

Moderators! do you think there is anything productive after this point? really?ukey:


----------



## Tradbow Guy

gnome said:


> Moderators! do you think there is anything productive after this point? really?ukey:


We dont need the mods to shut down everything that someone doesn't like come on man. Insults can be removed moderated and warned against but calling BS or disagreeing doesn't warrant thread lock IMO.


----------



## gnome

Tradbow Guy said:


> We dont need the mods to shut down everything that someone doesn't like come on man. Insults can be removed moderated and warned against but calling BS or disagreeing doesn't warrant thread lock IMO.


O.k. in your opinion , what more is to be gained? In MY opinion , it has turned from "lets find out the facts" to who can prove them shelves to be the most dominate poster.What is the answer that you would still like to learn from this exchange? When is enough , enough ? Honest debate is always good, but where are we RIGHT NOW, Be truthfull.


----------



## Stone Bridge

JINKSTER said:


> Ahhh....Stone...dang dude...That explains it...Oprah went off air on 09/09/2011...which indicates to me that it's been a little over 3 years since you got your last "fuzzy feeling".
> 
> Could I possibly interest you in a group hug? :laugh:


Bill, I think Oprah now has her own cable channel or network. I think my girl is still on the air. You'll have to search the clicker but she's worth it. LOL


----------



## Stone Bridge

gnome said:


> If you have an opposing opinion fine, if you disagree, fine, you can express it with respect to the other poster. But when you continually make personal attacks, it adds nothing to the discussion , or this form , and THAT is what makes you a TROLL. And your relentless personal attacks were many,and almost predictable , long before before I called attention to it. So who is the hypocrite?


So it is okay for you to call me a troll. Just making sure you are a hypocrite. You are. 

As for you calling in moderators to shut down a threat. What a cowardly thing to do. If you don't like a thread, don't read it. Very simple. Even you should be capable of understanding that. Maybe.


----------



## gnome

If I don't like a thread don't read it? WHAT? Bad behavior, is just that , and are saying to is OK to be disrespectful of other AT members? Posting a dissenting opinion is one thing, throwing in insults is another. Is it your opinion that you can call someone an "idiot" or state " your stupidity is obvious even from space" is constructive to building a good forum? This antagonistic form of posting does not do anything to promote "Archers helping archers" . I don't think it is "cowardly" to call for respect toward other posters. I don't think it is "cowardly" to call someone for disrespectful statements. So I ask you.......are you trying to help others......or just trying to come out on top.....regardless.


----------



## ranchoarcher

> ... Patents mean little in the end. Spin-Wings were patented and that didn't stop many imitators. Spin-Wings got copied because they were a breakthrough in arrow fletching. They have been proven in world-class competition and by extensive testing by many archers with no profit to make...


 There is the strong possibility that spin wings licensed their product to those other manufacturers. A very common practice and there is no requirement to inform anyone of an agreement. However, if these other companies are infringing then the patent can mean quite a bit. Prosecuting a patent case is very expensive, in the 7 figure range. Same applies for defending against it. In the end though, damages are often in the 10's of millions depending on many factors. The pendulum is generally on the patent holders side since the standard is clear and convincing that the defendant has to meet which is higher than beyond a reasonable doubt. The difficulty is coming up with the lawyer fees to file suit. For an infringer to chance it on that simple notion is very risky.


----------



## grantmac

Bottom line is this: 14 pages of actual FACTS won't matter because the OP won't admit the original numbers were false.

Until that change is made then all the other testing is irrelevant. Unfortunately this sort of marketing is par for the course with both Black Swan and Turbonock.

-Grant


----------



## Stone Bridge

Ranch, all you have to do is change one small element of a design and you have a new invention. You can't "patent" the use of Mylar for a vane. You can patent the shape. That's about it. All the other makers of spin vanes have different shapes and hardness degrees of vane. A different product in the eyes of the law.

No vane maker is going to spend large amounts of money haggling over this issue. We are not talking about a huge money-maker in vanes. It's really a cottage industry at best. So nobody sues over peanuts. Not smart people anyway.


----------



## turbonockguy

Stone Bridge said:


> Ranch, all you have to do is change one small element of a design and you have a new invention. You can't "patent" the use of Mylar for a vane. You can patent the shape. That's about it. All the other makers of spin vanes have different shapes and hardness degrees of vane. A different product in the eyes of the law.
> 
> No vane maker is going to spend large amounts of money haggling over this issue. We are not talking about a huge money-maker in vanes. It's really a cottage industry at best. So nobody sues over peanuts. Not smart people anyway.


I have to disagree with you to a degree. .If you have a utility patent rather than a design patent .you can protect the function of a patent. If you were to make a turbonock and make it a little longer and perhaps change the shape of the vanes As long as you use that twisted nock as a function. And. as long as I file suit within 1.5 years of learning of your infraction. I can sue you in federal court.

A lot of people get ripped off by those tv patent companies. Design patents were originally a type of patent for the furniture industry. so if a company designed a table which obviously the function can not be patented they can at least patent the design and get some degree of protection.
The sad thing that has happened to US patent law just a few years ago was that it is now first to file rather than first to invent. Which makes it much more difficult for individuals and benefits large corporations.
An example even if you have design drawings and they are dated and you sent a dated letter to yourself. which some folks think will protect them. and you got drunk at a bar and told you best friend about your patent. In essence he could go patent it before you . and you are screwed.
I am currently finishing a patent and virtually anyone I have communicated with on the patent , Has to sign a binding CDA form ( also called non disclosure forms)


----------



## ranchoarcher

Stone Bridge said:


> Ranch, all you have to do is change one small element of a design and you have a new invention. You can't "patent" the use of Mylar for a vane. You can patent the shape. That's about it. All the other makers of spin vanes have different shapes and hardness degrees of vane. A different product in the eyes of the law.
> 
> No vane maker is going to spend large amounts of money haggling over this issue. We are not talking about a huge money-maker in vanes. It's really a cottage industry at best. So nobody sues over peanuts. Not smart people anyway.



Your might want to look into that. It's fairly complex and doing what you said, "changing one element of a design" is more often exactly what lands a company in patent court when they think it's enough to get around it. A patent consists of a list of claims. Things the patent does and describes it. If any one or more of those claims is violated by someone else, that's infringement. I invent the 4 leg stool and you come along and make one three legs thinking the absence of the 4th leg skirts the patent, it doesn't. It's still a stool. The arrow vain industry might be small but that's no excuse for theft. Even a peanut size business can get whacked pretty hard for stealing and will often drill down to the personal assets of the people responsible. Thanks for the heads up though. I'll be sure not to buy from any of the copy cats if and when I buy vanes of that type.


----------



## ranchoarcher

> The sad thing that has happened to US patent law just a few years ago was that it is now first to file rather than first to invent. Which makes it much more difficult for individuals and benefits large corporations.
> An example even if you have design drawings and they are dated and you sent a dated letter to yourself. which some folks think will protect them. and you got drunk at a bar and told you best friend about your patent. In essence he could go patent it before you . and you are screwed.


 This was enacted due to the amount of he said she said arguments over who came up with it first. However, if there is undeniable evidence that the one party stole the idea, such as it being discussed in a court room a year or so prior by another party who was doing what is now called out in their patent application, their patent will be denied. Essentially the path of challenge before the patent is issued is still open and has been expanded using "prior art" you can introduce of your own into a competitors application to squash it. Prior art isn't limited to drawings. it can be anything recorded demonstrating your concept or idea.


----------



## BarneySlayer

Hold on...

Nick,

On your original test the arrow is 390 gn, the draw length is 29.75 inches (corrected after your misunderstanding of what draw length means), and at 252 fps, KE is about 55 ft-lbs.

On your latest test the arrow is 490 gn, (heavier), the draw length is 30 inches (longer), and your speed is 194 fps, putting out about 41 ft-lbs of kinetic energy.

Do you realize that this completely changes physics? Most bows get less efficient when you use lighter arrows, for very good reason.

If you still want to send somebody your bow to audit with a separate chronograph, I'm happy to do it. It'll have to be a 28.5" draw, but I can do it either fingers or release or both, and I can have somebody mark the arrow and check before I shoot to verify draw length. I'll have it in and out in a couple of days. I've got some 418 gn arrows that I can use, or you can send me a 390 gn arrow with it (but no plastic vanes please, as my comparison bow shoots off the shelf.)

Just need some daylight when I'm not working or hauling the kids to and from school. Not going to run my chronograph on lights powered by 60 Hz AC, pulsing 120 times per second 

Let me know!


----------



## Tradbow Guy

gnome said:


> O.k. in your opinion , what more is to be gained? In MY opinion , it has turned from "lets find out the facts" to who can prove them shelves to be the most dominate poster.What is the answer that you would still like to learn from this exchange? When is enough , enough ? Honest debate is always good, but where are we RIGHT NOW, Be truthfull.


I havent read every line in the threat but I have been asking a lot of questions trying to learn stuff and thats an honest answer. I know turbo keeps posting videos that im watching.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> I have to disagree with you to a degree. .If you have a utility patent rather than a design patent .you can protect the function of a patent. If you were to make a turbonock and make it a little longer and perhaps change the shape of the vanes As long as you use that twisted nock as a function. And. as long as I file suit within 1.5 years of learning of your infraction. I can sue you in federal court.
> 
> A lot of people get ripped off by those tv patent companies. Design patents were originally a type of patent for the furniture industry. so if a company designed a table which obviously the function can not be patented they can at least patent the design and get some degree of protection.
> The sad thing that has happened to US patent law just a few years ago was that it is now first to file rather than first to invent. Which makes it much more difficult for individuals and benefits large corporations.
> An example even if you have design drawings and they are dated and you sent a dated letter to yourself. which some folks think will protect them. and you got drunk at a bar and told you best friend about your patent. In essence he could go patent it before you . and you are screwed.
> I am currently finishing a patent and virtually anyone I have communicated with on the patent , Has to sign a binding CDA form ( also called non disclosure forms)


I have to agree with Stony to a point. I dont believe all the major manufactuers paid the STS guys to make his product with a slightly different design. Which is sad, because he had a great product that became obsolete when every company begin sticking their own on their bows.


----------



## ismo131

What is Turbos YouTube name?


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> Hold on...
> 
> Nick,
> 
> On your original test the arrow is 390 gn, the draw length is 29.75 inches (corrected after your misunderstanding of what draw length means), and at 252 fps, KE is about 55 ft-lbs.
> 
> On your latest test the arrow is 490 gn, (heavier), the draw length is 30 inches (longer), and your speed is 194 fps, putting out about 41 ft-lbs of kinetic energy.
> 
> Do you realize that this completely changes physics? Most bows get less efficient when you use lighter arrows, for very good reason.
> 
> If you still want to send somebody your bow to audit with a separate chronograph, I'm happy to do it. It'll have to be a 28.5" draw, but I can do it either fingers or release or both, and I can have somebody mark the arrow and check before I shoot to verify draw length. I'll have it in and out in a couple of days. I've got some 418 gn arrows that I can use, or you can send me a 390 gn arrow with it (but no plastic vanes please, as my comparison bow shoots off the shelf.)
> 
> Just need some daylight when I'm not working or hauling the kids to and from school. Not going to run my chronograph on lights powered by 60 Hz AC, pulsing 120 times per second
> 
> Let me know!


Before I do that I will do the test outdoors with my chrono. to see if there are any discrepancies. 
That I will do as soon as the temperature quits hovering around 0.


----------



## turbonockguy

ismo131 said:


> What is Turbos YouTube name?


on You tube you can type in turbonock also if you type in Randy Oitker on youtube. you can see some of the bareshaft shots he does. He is also sponsored by bohning so he uses blazers for regular shots. but a good many of the impossible shots He uses the t-4.
If you click on Alan Teitel on you tube. he has a site called slomo. and has a list of videos. there are several there shooting through water balloons and gel.
If you click on my web address at the bottom of my signature you can get to my website.


----------



## ismo131

turbonockguy said:


> on You tube you can type in turbonock also if you type in Randy Oitker on youtube. you can see some of the bareshaft shots he does. He is also sponsored by bohning so he uses blazers for regular shots. but a good many of the impossible shots He uses the t-4.
> If you click on Alan Teitel on you tube. he has a site called slomo. and has a list of videos. there are several there shooting through water balloons and gel.
> If you click on my web address at the bottom of my signature you can get to my website.


About turbonock and SloMo-videos. 
They are good no doudaboutit but it would be ewen more evidence if there were no fethers or vains just bareshaft and turbonock.


----------



## turbonockguy

Tradbow Guy said:


> I have to agree with Stony to a point. I dont believe all the major manufactuers paid the STS guys to make his product with a slightly different design. Which is sad, because he had a great product that became obsolete when every company begin sticking their own on their bows.


Here is the sad thing about patents.
A patent's only protection is that it gives you the right to sue in federal court!
Just to walk in the doors of that federal courthouse with a law suit at minimum will cost you $250,000
I paid about $7000 a year for patent infringement insurance,

At the AtA show I had one of the big players in the archery industry give me some advice. (i will not mention his name)
He wanted to buy my nocks and take them to China. Anyhow he suggested the patent insurance to me .
He told me that if he really wanted my product he would just take it. and wait and see if I would sue him.
If I did not have the funds to do so in a year and a half the patent became public domain.
I have seen ads recently where some attorneys will take on patent infringement suits on contingency.
So if you are a tinkerer like me. and consider filing a patent. You better have finances to access in some way.

Back in the 1970s I designed and manufactured belt buckles and pewter items. (google "Nick Snook buckles") they are now being sold on ebay as vintage buckles. Anyhow I got a Sears catalog contract. and bumped the worlds largest buckle company out of the catalog. That was not a good thing. The next thing I knew my designs were being copied by companies all over the us, My Michigan sales rep even started selling knockoff to sears, and sending me only half the orders. to make a long story short I sued 4 companies and 7 individuals in federal court.One of the companies and a few of the wealthy individuals paid "not to be mentioned in the suit" So they settled before the suit went to court and I used their money to pursue the rest. in all 2 companies went bankrupt and 3 individuals went bankrupt.
My lawyers made a lot of money. I kept my business.


----------



## grander

Is there ever a bad time for a plug?


----------



## gnome

Tradbow Guy said:


> I havent read every line in the threat but I have been asking a lot of questions trying to learn stuff and thats an honest answer. I know turbo keeps posting videos that im watching.


Yes , You are right, My apologies to you. I get very annoyed at insulting type posts that run other people down , there is never an acceptable reason (IMO) to do that. At that point, the thread had taken a nasty turn and looked pointless to continue, (IMO). Lets see how long it will stay in a positive direction.


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> Ok !! I am ready. This is the best I can do.
> I want to thank Rick Barbee for the help. I tried to do it as exact as I could.


Interesting-

The 490gr arrow had 40.9ke
The 300gr had 36.75
That's a 10% loss going to the lighter arrow...

40.9ke is about .83 arrow ke / lb-df. With a 30" draw, the bow must be approaching a 1 stored ke/lb-df. Still, would be nice to know he dfc so I can calculate the actual dynamic efficiency. If these limbs really are super awesome lightweight whatevers, the dynamic efficiency should show it.

BM


----------



## BarneySlayer

Aronnax said:


> Interesting-
> 
> The 490gr arrow had 40.9ke
> The 300gr had 36.75
> That's a 10% loss going to the lighter arrow...
> 
> 40.9ke is about .83 arrow ke / lb-df. With a 30" draw, the bow must be approaching a 1 stored ke/lb-df. Still, would be nice to know he dfc so I can calculate the actual dynamic efficiency. If these limbs really are super awesome lightweight whatevers, the dynamic efficiency should show it.
> 
> BM


Yes..

what is more, the initial test that started all the hype, 390 gn arrow, right in the middle of those, with a draw length 1/4" _less_ 252 fps, KE is about 55 ft-lbs.

Something magical is happening, and since the wild measurement was consistent, if we give Nick the benefit of the doubt in both competence and honesty, that means that something is up with the chronograph, possibly related to the lighting driven by AC. Since the chronographs measure time between changes in light levels, and lights running off of AC will pulse (LED bulbs driven by internal DC power supplies may not, if they've got a degree of regulation and filter capacitance), it makes all of his results suspect.

Until I, Joe, Hank, Blacky, or somebody with some kind of track record of understanding gets our hands on it, I don't consider any of these tests to be useful.


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> Yes..
> 
> what is more, the initial test that started all the hype, 390 gn arrow, right in the middle of those, with a draw length 1/4" _less_ 252 fps, KE is about 55 ft-lbs.
> 
> Something magical is happening, and since the wild measurement was consistent, if we give Nick the benefit of the doubt in both competence and honesty, that means that something is up with the chronograph, possibly related to the lighting driven by AC. Since the chronographs measure time between changes in light levels, and lights running off of AC will pulse (LED bulbs driven by internal DC power supplies may not, if they've got a degree of regulation and filter capacitance), it makes all of his results suspect.
> 
> Until I, Joe, Hank, Blacky, or somebody with some kind of track record of understanding gets our hands on it, I don't consider any of these tests to be useful.


What I will do to verify to myself and to you is as soon as I can get outside.(it is +2 today) It may be in the+ 20s this week. I will try to duplicate all the shots I did with the Black Swan in direct sunlight. I will do them AMO and also the way I did with the different grain arrows. and show the draw lengths.

Also in as much as over the years I have done just about all my testing with compounds. I am going to do some broadhead tests (indoors point blank) to see penetration
comparisons. This I will do with a 30 inch arrow and I will see how close I can get it to 10 grains per pound with the broadhead.
I will be shooting into eight two inch pieces of foam insulation..total 16 inches. 
I want to see what the Black Swan does with my hunting setup. and also do a conventional nock vs Turbonock comparison like Rick Barbee did.

This may take a day or two to get accomplished as I need to get my shop in order. I have not set up the Turbonock Finishing equipment since moving in December and I am running out of finished inventory.

From the very beginning of this thread. When I posted the first chrono data. I was not trying to defraud anyone. I have been basically on this site since almost its beginning.and over the years there have been several heated discussion on my Turbonock products. Some folks like them Some do not. But my sales keep slowly increasing. 
I will post the results of the testing even if it shows that the chrono was not working properly. on the first test.
. I want to figure this out as much as some of you.

Some want me to apologize for attempting to defraud you all. I will not apologize for what I did not do. I am apologizing to all of you right now for causing such a ruckus!!!!!!!!!!!
I wonder if anyone who posted venomous remarks.can find it in themselves to apologize? Not to me. I do not care. but to the archery community on this forum.
Somehow we ( all of us) have to learn to agree and disagree, without inflammatory remarks that solve nothing.
If you truly love this sport as I do. 
I do visit other Archery sites. and sadly Archery Talk has a bit of a reputation and it is not positive. 
If you view what happened here only a very few people were really nasty. but because of their behavior .many people will not post. One prominent Archer is leaving archery talk as a result of the behavior he sees here. That is Sad.


----------



## Sanford

> He just forwarded a Graph that was developed at Hewitt Packard that show projected speeds base on putting in data from one shot. so you can see what speeds would be achieved at different grain weights.


It was the made up graph for me. It falls within how BS is falsely advertising that they are selling 250-300 pfs bows. If you care about the uninitiated person that drops down big $$$ based on this, then you care about what's going on with archery. The Big Boys do their fair share of hyperbolic advertising, just not that blatantly. Now, if you want to talk again about the good old days of integrity in the sport, marketing tactics shot that down decades ago.

The arms-length approach to your test would be that you are holding a recurve but getting compound speed readings. "What's wrong" with my reading is the standard response. You were challenged because you took the opposite approach, trying to prove why it could be what it ain't. Again, feeding down that faked graph and then saying you are not backing down from your position put you in the advertising mode for BS.

Why not address the faked graph?


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> It was the made up graph for me. It falls within how BS is falsely advertising that they are selling 250-300 pfs bows. If you care about the uninitiated person that drops down big $$$ based on this, then you care about what's going on with archery. The Big Boys do their fair share of hyperbolic advertising, just not that blatantly. Now, if you want to talk again about the good old days of integrity in the sport, marketing tactics shot that down decades ago.
> 
> The arms-length approach to your test would be that you are holding a recurve but getting compound speed readings. "What's wrong" with my reading is the standard response. You were challenged because you took the opposite approach, trying to prove why it could be what it ain't. Again, feeding down that faked graph and then saying you are not backing down from your position put you in the advertising mode for BS.
> 
> Why not address the faked graph?


That graph was developed At Hewitt Packard labs back when they were doing a lot of testing for various archery companies.
Arvid Danielson as well Dr. Ken Shaw, from MIT. we on the team that developed it. The graph was worked up originally for Jennings back in the 1970s. 

As to Bs You can believe what ever you want.


----------



## patrick2cents

Ok, that graph is just an extrapolation of shots at one arrow weight... it shows energy output unchanged over a HUGE range of arrow weights-weights where it is known your efficiency goes to pot quickly. Even a compound won't act like that!


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> That graph was developed At Hewitt Packard labs back when they were doing a lot of testing for various archery companies.
> Arvid Danielson as well Dr. Ken Shaw, from MIT. we on the team that developed it. The graph was worked up originally for Jennings back in the 1970s.
> 
> As to Bs You can believe what ever you want.


I have nothing against you, but you see, that's the kind of hype and name-dropping in the face of reality that you have camped with but complain you are being picked on when folks speak up. That's playing to the ignorant side of the market base to take advantage of them.

No, it's not what you say. Never was because it can't be at all. It doesn't take but a High School algebra kid to see that.

Your first clue doesn't even involve the math impossibility in it. Just read what Arvid fed you to feed this board. One data point it was developed to work from. Well, I have a pair of limbs that will give you that same "one data point" but would never break near the readings on that graph. 

Let's answer this one, then move to why two different math formulas don't graph the same.

We each just shoot one shot and record the speed based on arrow weight. 

So, how does the magical graph know the difference between my data point and Arvid's????


----------



## grantmac

turbonockguy said:


> That graph was developed At Hewitt Packard labs back when they were doing a lot of testing for various archery companies.
> Arvid Danielson as well Dr. Ken Shaw, from MIT. we on the team that developed it. The graph was worked up originally for Jennings back in the 1970s.
> 
> As to Bs You can believe what ever you want.


Arvid has fed you a lie and instead of taking a moment to consider whether what you have received is accurate (it's not) you are now sticking to that lie. Unfortunately this severely undermines any credibility you may have.

Simply put: that graph is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out computation no matter who created it.

-Grant


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> What I will do to verify to myself and to you is as soon as I can get outside.(it is +2 today) It may be in the+ 20s this week. I will try to duplicate all the shots I did with the Black Swan in direct sunlight. I will do them AMO and also the way I did with the different grain arrows. and show the draw lengths.
> 
> Also in as much as over the years I have done just about all my testing with compounds. I am going to do some broadhead tests (indoors point blank) to see penetration
> comparisons. This I will do with a 30 inch arrow and I will see how close I can get it to 10 grains per pound with the broadhead.
> I will be shooting into eight two inch pieces of foam insulation..total 16 inches.
> I want to see what the Black Swan does with my hunting setup. *and also do a conventional nock vs Turbonock comparison like Rick Barbee did*.
> 
> This may take a day or two to get accomplished as I need to get my shop in order. I have not set up the Turbonock Finishing equipment since moving in December and I am running out of finished inventory.
> 
> From the very beginning of this thread. When I posted the first chrono data. I was not trying to defraud anyone. I have been basically on this site since almost its beginning.and over the years there have been several heated discussion on my Turbonock products. Some folks like them Some do not. But my sales keep slowly increasing.
> I will post the results of the testing even if it shows that the chrono was not working properly. on the first test.
> . I want to figure this out as much as some of you.
> 
> Some want me to apologize for attempting to defraud you all. I will not apologize for what I did not do. I am apologizing to all of you right now for causing such a ruckus!!!!!!!!!!!
> I wonder if anyone who posted venomous remarks.can find it in themselves to apologize? Not to me. I do not care. but to the archery community on this forum.
> Somehow we ( all of us) have to learn to agree and disagree, without inflammatory remarks that solve nothing.
> If you truly love this sport as I do.
> I do visit other Archery sites. and sadly Archery Talk has a bit of a reputation and it is not positive.
> If you view what happened here only a very few people were really nasty. but because of their behavior .many people will not post. One prominent Archer is leaving archery talk as a result of the behavior he sees here. That is Sad.


If you do the conventional nock vs the turbonock, DO NOT USE BROADHEADS!!!! That will only confound your results and will not show any useful data comparing the nocks. Like I said in that earlier post, use field points of the same size shape and weight. Also shoot them through the chrono and post each speed with the arrow on the target. That way you can use the chrono data as a potential cause of whatever effect you do find if any at all.


----------



## Easykeeper

Like was said earlier, and I posted in #292, the chart in question is nothing more than a chart of the kinetic energy formula with curves for KE at different energy levels.

Aronnax even worked up his own graph, probably took only a few minutes. 

The point is you can't use that graph to extrapolate arrow velocities. All it's good for is telling you the kinetic energy of one particular shot if you know the weight of the arrow and have an accurate velocity.


----------



## Sanford

Easykeeper said:


> Like was said earlier, and I posted in #292, the chart in question is nothing more than a chart of the kinetic energy formula with curves for KE at different energy levels.
> 
> Aronnax even worked up his own graph, probably took only a few minutes.
> 
> The point is you can't use that graph to extrapolate arrow velocities. All it's good for is telling you the kinetic energy of one particular shot if you know the weight of the arrow and have an accurate velocity.


Kind of like me taking a typical weight and age graph based on national average and then plugging in my age to determine my weight  Hint: If I need to know "my" weight, what other folks weigh, or their age for that matter, is irrelevant.

But, we know understanding the deception is not key. Not understanding it is, as it creates doubt. Doubt leaves an open door to at least some folks.


----------



## BarneySlayer

grantmac said:


> Arvid has fed you a lie and instead of taking a moment to consider whether what you have received is accurate (it's not) you are now sticking to that lie. Unfortunately this severely undermines any credibility you may have.
> 
> Simply put: that graph is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out computation no matter who created it.
> 
> -Grant


Nick, you have many good qualities. You are not afraid to try something different. You are not afraid to go out there and sell something you believe in. You generally remain polite, and have good skills talking to people.

Giving you the benefit of the doubt in terms of honesty, you are an absolutely terrible scientist or engineer.

A graph like that is a curve that expresses an estimate, and it is a generic estimate based on knowing nothing about the particular product. That a manufacturer of a particular product would even offer it for any reason is unconscionable. They know their product, and they should damn well know, for real, what it will do under specific circumstances, not test it under an optimal scenario, and then extrapolate on an optimistic curve from there when it suits them.

So far, in this thread and others, you've made a lot of claims that are downright false, and then back off and say that's just what you think, and clarify that you're not an engineer, but then do some name dropping as justification, but still at arm's distance. It's a pattern, one that I've become familiar with in person, as I have a friend who is a pathological liar.

I'm not calling you a liar, because I don't know you very well. I hold out the possibility that you might be honestly and actually just naive and technically lack competence, which itself is difficult to believe if you have in fact been involved with archery for such a long time. However, I have to say, between your patterns of claim, distance, rationalize, justify, etc., and your intonations that sound like faux surprise discovering the initial chronograph readings in your video (which I had to ask myself, who sets up a video camera to do some preliminary chronograph measurements, particularly if a person only intended to share the results _after_ the surprise of something new and revolutionary), it looks to me, and I suspect anybody who knows anything about this, really, really fishy. It may sell bows and nocks to people who don't know any better, but in my opinion, the damage you do to yourself isn't worth it.

If you genuinely would like to either verify or clarify your data, and would like somebody who really doesn't give a crap to make independent measurements, I'm happy to play pony for that. If you really want to know something about that bow, see if Hank will run it through the paces. His testing is far more extensive. If you want to dodge the independent testing you had previously offered with the weather, that's fine too.

I'm not participating in this thread anymore. If you do become serious about learning something, and would like my help, PM me.

Good luck


----------



## Fury90flier

deleted...nothing more to see here


----------



## Matt_Potter

Did I mention speed is over rated LOL

Matt


----------



## turbonockguy

for what it is worth. Here are some covers from Hewitt Packard Magazine. Way in the past before a good many of you were born. 
The first photo is Dr.Ken Shawn with a computer hooked up to an early Jennings. The Second photo Is Arvid Danielson. the third is a brief article.
These were the guys who did the science. and developed the measurement techniques, that helped greatly in the development of modern archery.
I know !! just hype and Bs.


----------



## gnome

The red bow in the picture looks like a Jennings "Split T". And it LEFT handed to boot. I have one in blue, and it makes my grin every time I shoot it. Old school rules.


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> for what it is worth. Here are some covers from Hewitt Packard Magazine. Way in the past before a good many of you were born.
> The first photo is Dr.Ken Shawn with a computer hooked up to an early Jennings. The Second photo Is Arvid Danielson. the third is a brief article.
> These were the guys who did the science. and developed the measurement techniques, that helped greatly in the development of modern archery.
> I know !! just hype and Bs.


Please elaborate-

What science did they do? What measurement techniques did they develop? What did their work do for the development of modern archery? How do the photos and name drops validate the bunk chart in question? Not trying to be mean spirited, I honestly just want to understand your logic.

What I see is a guy in a lab coat posing for a picture of a piece of test equipment. Apparently a low frequency digital signal analyzer. I also see that Arvid posed for a photo. The article reads (at least how much of it that is posted) like a sales pitch why scientists and engineers should buy that analyzer from HP.

BM


----------



## turbonockguy

Aronnax said:


> Please elaborate-
> 
> What science did they do? What measurement techniques did they develop? What did their work do for the development of modern archery? How do the photos and name drops validate the bunk chart in question? Not trying to be mean spirited, I honestly just want to understand your logic.
> 
> What I see is a guy in a lab coat posing for a picture of a piece of test equipment. Apparently a low frequency digital signal analyzer. I also see that Arvid posed for a photo. The article reads (at least how much of it that is posted) like a sales pitch why scientists and engineers should buy that analyzer from HP.
> 
> BM


These guys developed basically the graph used to predict performance.
They also used that equipment to test the performance of the bows. The original Jennings prototype showed some problems when tested and Jennings made improvements to the bow before it went to market. HP did a good deal of testing for the archery industry.
I think they were also involved in the development of the Muzy Broadhead. 
Obviously the HP magazine was promoting their products.


----------



## turbonockguy

grantmac said:


> Arvid has fed you a lie and instead of taking a moment to consider whether what you have received is accurate (it's not) you are now sticking to that lie. Unfortunately this severely undermines any credibility you may have.
> 
> Simply put: that graph is a classic example of garbage in, garbage out computation no matter who created it.
> 
> -Grant


What proof do you have to back your claim of garbage in garbage out?


----------



## turbonockguy

Huntinsker said:


> If you do the conventional nock vs the turbonock, DO NOT USE BROADHEADS!!!! That will only confound your results and will not show any useful data comparing the nocks. Like I said in that earlier post, use field points of the same size shape and weight. Also shoot them through the chrono and post each speed with the arrow on the target. That way you can use the chrono data as a potential cause of whatever effect you do find if any at all.


I do not want to do any more chrono indoors until see what the chrono does in direct sunlight. (tomorrow may be warm enough as it may get up to 30 degrees.f
So I will use the field tips as you suggest.

For my own curiosity I am going to carefully shoot broadheads. indoors . I want to see if I get similar results as Rick Barbee, I am not going to use the chrono for this. but I will be using the bow at 30 inches and 490 grain arrow with a Badger two blade. I had to let the arrow its full length from the store. to get the weight,but I will index it for a 30 inch draw.
What it will show is whether an arrow rotating at low rpms or an arrow rotating at high rpms out penetrates the other.
does the energy stored in the high rotating arrow transfer more energy to the Target? If it does it will penetrate more.
If the straight nocked arrow which will (from earlier test) have at least a 2fps advantage and will be hitting the target 
faster have a better penetration?
This test will show that. 
I will use the same tape measure for each arrow !!


----------



## Hank D Thoreau

I use IR light bars on my chrono, even outdoors, and even though I live in sunny Southern California. It gives me stable results, repeatable day to day. In my recent set of tests, I made sure that my first test reproduced results from previous days. I am not sure whether your chrono has a light bar option, but it is a good investment if it does. I always look at my results to see if they pass the "reasonableness test". If I am at all concerned, I measure a well known standard to see if I get the expected result. The important thing is to always challenge your results. I am constantly checking both new and old results to ensure that I do not have any errors. 

The most interesting chrono test I ever did was when I was practicing through a chrono and could not get stable results. In fact, I was getting numbers that ranged about 10 fps and the bow was noisy at a brace height I had shot for a year. I raised the brace height and the speed stabilized and the bow quieted down to a normal level. I had to raise it one inch. Within a month my bow exploded from a carbon failure. I had actually caught and tested my bow just before it failed. The bow was slowly failing which probably made it unstable at the lower brace height. I was really questioning why my bow measurements were not what I had expected until the explosion occurred.


----------



## grantmac

He's fed you a chart for determining KE as a function of arrow weight and velocity as a means of estimating the potential velocity of a bow and arrow combination. That is the garbage in.
You are now trying to pass it off as the actual measured performance of a bow, that is the garbage out.

You've been told this is wrong, you've been patiently explained why the information you are providing is false. But you stick to your claims like a Sunday market snake-oil salesman and the only "proof" you offer is an advertisement for a computer system that was out of date in the 80s.

-Grant


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> I do not want to do any more chrono indoors until see what the chrono does in direct sunlight. (tomorrow may be warm enough as it may get up to 30 degrees.f
> So I will use the field tips as you suggest.
> 
> For my own curiosity I am going to carefully shoot broadheads. indoors . I want to see if I get similar results as Rick Barbee, I am not going to use the chrono for this. but I will be using the bow at 30 inches and 490 grain arrow with a Badger two blade. I had to let the arrow its full length from the store. to get the weight,but I will index it for a 30 inch draw.
> *What it will show is whether an arrow rotating at low rpms or an arrow rotating at high rpms out penetrates the other*.
> does the energy stored in the high rotating arrow transfer more energy to the Target? If it does it will penetrate more.
> If the straight nocked arrow which will (from earlier test) have at least a 2fps advantage and will be hitting the target
> faster have a better penetration?
> This test will show that.
> I will use the same tape measure for each arrow !!


You can't say that the faster rotating arrow out penetrates the slower rotating arrow because you won't know for sure what the speeds are. This is where you fall short on your tests. You can't cut corners like that. You must know the speed because the speed determines the energy which directly impacts the penetration potential. If you find that the turbonock arrow travels slower than the traditional nock and still penetrates deeper into the target, assuming the target media is consistent, then you have something to talk about. Not only that, if you video the chronograph, then you can refute any potential claims that you fudged the DL one way or another. The more data you can record, the better the test. Without the speed data, you're just a guy shooting a foam target in his basement, not proving a dang thing.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau

Interesting question regarding rotational energy. When the arrow if fired, there is an initial energy imparted into the arrow in the form of translational, vibrational and rotational. Generally speaking, translational energy > vibrational energy > rotational energy. Energy transfer occurs as the arrow interacts with the environment. Also, energy can transfer from one mode to another, such as vibrational to rotational. So the key question is, what proportion of energy is in each of these modes and how much energy can transfer between modes. If rotational energy is very small compared to translational, then you would not expect much of an impact. I am sure somebody has quantified this. I am looking for articles that address this issue.


----------



## turbonockguy

Hank D Thoreau said:


> Interesting question regarding rotational energy. When the arrow if fired, there is an initial energy imparted into the arrow in the form of translational, vibrational and rotational. Generally speaking, translational energy > vibrational energy > rotational energy. Energy transfer occurs as the arrow interacts with the environment. Also, energy can transfer from one mode to another, such as vibrational to rotational. So the key question is, what proportion of energy is in each of these modes and how much energy can transfer between modes. If rotational energy is very small compared to translational, then you would not expect much of an impact. I am sure somebody has quantified this. I am looking for articles that address this issue.


Thanks Hank.

When I did penetration tests with compounds. I was usually at a distance of about 20 yds.
The reason for this was to allow the conventional fletch to get up to its top rotational speed.
At that distance from the bow depending on arrow speed it will have rotated two times. using wind resistance.
at 20 yds it is rotating around 400 rpm.
The Turbo nocked arrow in that same distance will have rotated 24 times. or about 4000 rpm at 200 fps.
Now the Turbonock took some energy to initiate rotation.and loses about 2 fps at the bow.
But since it is now rotating. It does not require the fletching to make the arrow rotate.
To really get the benefit of the Turbonock t-4 you should refletch with much smaller vanes. or feathers.
All you need is enough vane to keep the arrow spinning ,since it has been spun mechanically by the nock
I am going to do a test indoors at 9 yards. which may be a problem as this does not give much distance fora the wind resistance to slow down the conventional nocked arrow. also I will be giving the advantage to the conventional nocked arrow by using the same large fletching on both test arrows, when the turbonock really does not require that large energy robbing vane.
Rick Barbee did his penetration testing at 15 yds for this very reason.
I am thinking that even at 9 yds there should be some measurable difference. 
For what it is worth I will also chrono both shots . 
I will also do this test outdoors with the chrono at 20 yds as soon as the weather breaks.


----------



## turbonockguy

Huntinsker said:


> You can't say that the faster rotating arrow out penetrates the slower rotating arrow because you won't know for sure what the speeds are. This is where you fall short on your tests. You can't cut corners like that. You must know the speed because the speed determines the energy which directly impacts the penetration potential. If you find that the turbonock arrow travels slower than the traditional nock and still penetrates deeper into the target, assuming the target media is consistent, then you have something to talk about. Not only that, if you video the chronograph, then you can refute any potential claims that you fudged the DL one way or another. The more data you can record, the better the test. Without the speed data, you're just a guy shooting a foam target in his basement, not proving a dang thing.


OK I will set up the chrono. This will be at 9 yds indoors . Also when the temperature breaks (it is 9 degrees today )I will repeat this test outdoors in sunlight.
Just want to forewarn you . The arrow will be longer than 30 inches, I am trying to get a weight that trad shooters use for hunting. so Arrow will weigh 490 grains. and I will set it up to a 30 inch draw. It will just be longer.
Both arrows identical except for the nock.
I will also weigh the nocks.
I will do all shots with the arrow indexed to line up with the plunger.
This is a test I have done outdoors with a compound at 20 yds. The reason for 20 yds is to allow the windresistance to do its stuff to both arrows.
At 9 yds I hope to see some difference, (I may or may not.) That is why I do experiments. This is enjoyable for me.
When I first tested Turbonock prototypes 14 years ago I built a shooting machine on a farm and took shots to 80 yds with it. At 80 yds in about a 15 mph cross wind the turbonock prototype held a group of 2inches where the conventional arrow went to 8 inches.
The conventional arrow had three 4inch feathers. the turbonock had three .5 inch feathers.


----------



## Huntinsker

turbonockguy said:


> OK I will set up the chrono. This will be at 9 yds indoors . Also when the temperature breaks (it is 9 degrees today )I will repeat this test outdoors in sunlight.
> Just want to forewarn you . The arrow will be longer than 30 inches, I am trying to get a weight that trad shooters use for hunting. so Arrow will weigh 490 grains. and I will set it up to a 30 inch draw. It will just be longer.
> Both arrows identical except for the nock.
> I will also weigh the nocks.
> I will do all shots with the arrow indexed to line up with the plunger.
> This is a test I have done outdoors with a compound at 20 yds. The reason for 20 yds is to allow the windresistance to do its stuff to both arrows.
> At 9 yds I hope to see some difference, (I may or may not.) That is why I do experiments. This is enjoyable for me.
> When I first tested Turbonock prototypes 14 years ago I built a shooting machine on a farm and took shots to 80 yds with it. At 80 yds in about a 15 mph cross wind the turbonock prototype held a group of 2inches where the conventional arrow went to 8 inches.
> The conventional arrow had three 4inch feathers. the turbonock had three .5 inch feathers.


It doesn't matter how long the arrows are as long as you measure the DL like this.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> The conventional arrow had three 4inch feathers. the turbonock had three .5 inch feathers.


That alone could and should be the genesis of your reading. In a 15 mph crosswind, the lower profile feathers are going to track better, much better. The larger feathers mean better directional stability, but direction is in following with the current with stability, correction ability, not in cutting through it. As long as the 1/2" feathers stabilized the arrow correctly, they had much less drag influence by cross-wind. That's why low profile mylar vanes are used mainly for distance shooting. Why vary that variable for the 80 yard test?


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> That alone could and should be the genesis of your reading. In a 15 mph crosswind, the lower profile feathers are going to track better, much better. The larger feathers mean better directional stability, but direction is in following with the current with stability, correction ability, not in cutting through it. As long as the 1/2" feathers stabilized the arrow correctly, they had much less drag influence by cross-wind. That's why low profile mylar vanes are used mainly for distance shooting. Why vary that variable for the 80 yard test?


I was showing that the very small vanes would stabilize the arrow just as well a the larger vanes. and also improved crosswind shooting. The test was done with several turbonock prototypes varying in vane area from a total or .25 to1.50 suare inches. The first production turbonock was made with .80 sq. in. of vane area and 6 degrees offset and would stabilize mechanical hunting tips. the second production version used 1.60 sq. in. of vane area also 4 degrees offset. and would stabilize fixed blade broadheads as well as mechanicals.
The third production version was the t-4. which enables arrows to be fletched with much smaller fletching and maintain accuracy with less speed loss. I have with my compound been able to stabilize a 100 gr Muzy with Bohning mini blazers (4 fletch)
It has only been in the past year or two that the trad community has started using the t-4. and so far those shooting them have been way more postitve than those discussing them.
It was the same with the compound community 12 years ago. All the issues being brought up by trad shooters are basically the same. If you want to get really bored you can go back through the years and see the same issues hashed over and over again. I used to post with my name (nick snook) if you want to search.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> Thanks Hank.
> 
> When I did penetration tests with compounds. I was usually at a distance of about 20 yds.
> The reason for this was to allow the conventional fletch to get up to its top rotational speed.
> At that distance from the bow depending on arrow speed it will have rotated two times. using wind resistance.
> at 20 yds it is rotating around 400 rpm.


Im sorry but I still have to disagree with this. Nearly every video of a slow motion arrow aside from the one you posted testing your nocks that i've seen the arrow spins many times more then 2 at 20 yards.


----------



## turbonockguy

turbonockguy said:


> I was showing that the very small vanes would stabilize the arrow just as well a the larger vanes. and also improved crosswind shooting. The test was done with several turbonock prototypes varying in vane area from a total or .25 to1.50 suare inches. The first production turbonock was made with .80 sq. in. of vane area and 6 degrees offset and would stabilize mechanical hunting tips. the second production version used 1.60 sq. in. of vane area also 4 degrees offset. and would stabilize fixed blade broadheads as well as mechanicals.
> The third production version was the t-4. which enables arrows to be fletched with much smaller fletching and maintain accuracy with less speed loss. I have with my compound been able to stabilize a 100 gr Muzy with Bohning mini blazers (4 fletch)
> It has only been in the past year or two that the trad community has started using the t-4. and so far those shooting them have been way more postitve than those discussing them.
> It was the same with the compound community 12 years ago. All the issues being brought up by trad shooters are basically the same. If you want to get really bored you can go back through the years and see the same issues hashed over and over again. I used to post with my name (nick snook) if you want to search.


i just dug up some photos of those early experiments








These were arrows from my first experiments. the large fletch was the control arrow.







This was the 80 yd group. c was the control arrow, the t designations were turbo prototypes.







This was my first shooting machine,








This was a test I did at 20 yds. I was wanting to see if rotating an arrow at high speed would in effect make it perform as if it had a stiffer spine. It does.
In this test I used 1716 arrows. and a 70 lb bow. (way under spined) I kept three arrows with regular nocks and made three with turbo prototypes.
the regular arrows flew wildly and made an overall group of about 4 ft. two arrows broke in mid air. the same arrows with the turbo prototype shot a 9/16 inch group.
I did use a long string to the trigger of the shooting machine.


----------



## turbonockguy

Tradbow Guy said:


> Im sorry but I still have to disagree with this. Nearly every video of a slow motion arrow aside from the one you posted testing your nocks that i've seen the arrow spins many times more then 2 at 20 yards.



The first video I slowed down and as best as I could count the arrow made about 10 rotations. in that shot Which is pretty good for 20 yds. but there is no way to tell what the distance is. in the other video there was no way to count revolutions over a distance.
now looking at the slow motion I am guessing it was done at perhaps 240 frames per second at best. because when you run the video on you tube at .25 speed. (you can slow down video on youtube by clicking the settings button) The fletching was blurring which means the slo motion camera was not shooting at a very high frame rate. 
In the video I had done by Alan Teitel. He used a $15,000 camera that shoots at 5000 frames per second. so obviously the arrows do not seem to be rotating much in the video. but the turbonock arrow rotates 45 degrees from the string to the riser. and 2 times in 5 feet. Nothing!, using just wind resistance can do that. 24 revolutions in 20 yds.

I use the 2 revolutions in 20 yds because that is what you get with a conventional fletched arrow with about 2 degrees offset. 

Now with a trad bow you use high helical and can get perhaps 10 revolutions in 20 yds. and you also use up a lot of energy. and that is speed loss and trajectory loss.
If you put a t-4 on an arrow you can use half the size feathers. and shoot them with 4 degrees offset or helical. and get 24 revolutions in 20 yds without giving 
up all that speed. not to mention the WOOOOSHING sound all that rotating feather makes going down range. and greatly reduce the parallax at the same time.

I used to set up at some of the midwest hunting shows. next to Byron Ferguson. Wow! You want to see some radical helical!
He needs it to shoot the coins his wife throws . he makes a lot of his shots less than 5 yds and really has to reduce the parallax as much as he can. 
I once watched him practicing at a show in his booth an actually shot a quarter on the way up that his wife threw. He took it about two feet above her hand . and was only about 8 ft away!! He and I have the same hero . Good ole Howard Hill.


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> What proof do you have to back your claim of garbage in garbage out?


ke = weight * velocity^2 / 450800

if you solve for velocity (basic 9th grade algebra, I can show you the steps if it helps)...

velocity = sqrt(ke * 450800 / weight)

...you can sub in any hypothetical ke and weight values and predict a velocity. What this equation will show you is that as mass (arrow weight) approaches zero, velocity approaches infinity, which is impossible. It is completely neglecting the fact that as arrow mass approaches zero, efficiency also approaches zero. The rate at which efficiency approaches zero would be specific to the individual bow. A low mass high efficiency limb, as the bow mentioned in the beginning of this thread, would "hold on to" (if you will) efficiency longer, than a slow/heavy limb (i.e. self bow).

17 pages in and still no dfc, and we have devolved into a debate about turbonocks. yay.

BM


----------



## turbonockguy

Yesterday I found out how I got the "unbelievable" 252 ,254 fps readings from the chrono. It happened again while I was messing around shooting broadheads indoors. 

To do the test I had to move the shooting machine to the other side of the basement. to get an 8 yd shot.
I was going to shoot into foam with a turbo arrow and same arrow with a conventional nock.
I set up the chrono 3 ft from the bow after I lined it up with the target. Then I hung the Halogen lights over the diffusers on the chrono. and started shooting. I was getting 188 fps readings for the arrow with the regular nock. and 191 readings for the turbonock arrow. one of the turbo shots also gave a 188 reading. So both arrows were in essence shooting the same speed. The strange thing was that the Turbo arrow even at this close range was out penetrating the other arrow by an inch to about 2 inches on one series of shots. and I was being quite careful about the draw length.
Then I decided to move the shooting machine to hit another part of the target. I then moved the chrono about six inches to the left to line up with the new shooting line. ( I did not think to re adjust the lights) BIG MISTAKE.
The first shot after the move gave me 252 fps!!! I had moved the chrono enough that it was getting direct light to one of the sensors rather than diffused light. an that 4 inch move screwed up it readings.

I will put the video together and post it. even though the chrono goofed ,the penetration issue is interesting.

I do apologize to all those who commented about this here .(even the mean ones) It was my fault the misreadings happened. 
I do believe when the chrono was giving consistent readings they were accurate, but as I have said before, when the temperature goes up a little I will re shoot all the tests over again outdoors in sunlight.


----------



## gnome

And the winner is........
Post #13......pegged it.


Looking for the positive...I have learned a lot about the math and physics involved in testing.
And the incredible amount of knowledge that is hidden in the members of this forum.
Thanks Nick, for hanging in there, and finding out the problem with the numbers. Thanks everybody else for the lesson.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Nick, that's good news to here you figured it out. 
A year ago I posted the math as well as Easykeeper on the TR-4 which you instructed traditional archers to use. I went over it with a engineering at work until it was over my head. Lol Now at that time members were asking for slow motion video proof. Which you didn't have. Well at least the engineering at PSE would not give you. I took your word for it. Since I did some looking into them myself and Rick's video's. I put them on my son's arrow and mine posted pictures and my thoughts. I go flack for it. I think your results are real good and you own up to them.

Once again thanks for hanging in there.
Dan


----------



## BarneySlayer

I feel compelled. I know I am no longer participating, but I can't resist from responding to the ludicrous.

An arrow is not a drill. You don't slice through a steak more easily pressing the blade sideways. Even if you put a drill bit on the front, the rotational inertia along the axis of the arrow is not significant enough accomplish much. You can get an arrow to rotate quickly by blowing on it.. 

I wouldn't put .5" fletching on an arrow with a broadhead. You're begging for it to plane Off target.

What a turbo nock can accomplish is immediately impart spin, and benefit a poorly tuned setup by giving an initial tug backwards that may serve to straighten the arrow, much like a whisker biscuit can. Considering the low proportion of archers who know how to, and bother to tune their setups, this is a plausible benefit in many regards. In terms of penetration, the overwhelming factor is how straight the arrow is impacting the target.

However, the more fletching surface area you have, which is desireable for stabilizing a broadhead, and the higher the velocity, the more quickly the arrow will return to whatever rate of rotation the aerodynamics dictate.


----------



## Sanford

BarneySlayer said:


> n terms of penetration, the overwhelming factor is how straight the arrow is impacting the target.


That's about the nutshell of it. Friction is the deciding factor once momentum is being halted. As for rotational energy somehow changing directions and becoming momentum for penetration, or, drilling effect? Even if all of the energy could magically change vector, there's not enough mass related to it. If you could free-spin an arrow at 4000 rpms, you could easily stop it dead by a single touch of the tip of your little finger.

Folks who have tested and tested penetration all get different results, and that's just with changing the arrow mass by huge degrees. We will never get verifiable and confirmation one way or the other, as every test and tester is a new test - IOW, there's too many changing variables to capture. One guy uses foam, one guy uses hay, one guy uses gel, then, we have the equipment, much bigger variables. In this regard, testing for the spin factor becomes non-issue, as it is only a fly in an elephant weighing session.


----------



## BarneySlayer

Nick, while I would urge you to refrain from making factual claims of causation, if you have access to a high resolution high speed camera, a factor that might be worth looking at, if you're inclined, is how the initial rapid rotation might affect the damping of arrow flexure after the arrow has cleared the bow.. But, please don't make any claims until you can show it!


----------



## Tradbow Guy

If you look at an animals wound channel there isn't a hole bored through them. Its a hole strait through them, when that broadhead hits something its rotation is over with and its going in strait.


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> I feel compelled. I know I am no longer participating, but I can't resist from responding to the ludicrous.
> 
> An arrow is not a drill. You don't slice through a steak more easily pressing the blade sideways. Even if you put a drill bit on the front, the rotational inertia along the axis of the arrow is not significant enough accomplish much. You can get an arrow to rotate quickly by blowing on it..
> 
> I wouldn't put .5" fletching on an arrow with a broadhead. You're begging for it to plane Off target.
> 
> What a turbo nock can accomplish is immediately impart spin, and benefit a poorly tuned setup by giving an initial tug backwards that may serve to straighten the arrow, much like a whisker biscuit can. Considering the low proportion of archers who know how to, and bother to tune their setups, this is a plausible benefit in many regards. In terms of penetration, the overwhelming factor is how straight the arrow is impacting the target.
> 
> However, the more fletching surface area you have, which is desireable for stabilizing a broadhead, and the higher the velocity, the more quickly the arrow will return to whatever rate of rotation the aerodynamics dictate.


Would not more surface area = more wind resistance? If I remember correctly My patent attorney who is also an aerospace engineer explained to me in a conversation that wind resistance on an object, projectile , aircraft, whatever , is based on two factors. one it shape and secondly its surface area.
I have found that if your bow is tuned. and you are using a turbonock. as long as your vanes have more surface area than your broadhead you will have good arrow flight.
The Turbonock initiates spin mechanically so all you need is enough vane to keep it spinning. 
a conventional nocked arrow needs much more vane area to stabilize the same broadhead, and once it is flying that surface area is a liability.

I found this out when manufacturing my original turbonocks. 
The first one I made with vanes was called the DeadX which has .8 sq in. of vane area. it would stabilize mechanical hunting tips. but a Muzzy would hang a left turn at 20 yds. I designed a second production version called the Hunter which has 1.6 sq, in, of vane area and about 1/2 the off set of the DeadX . it stabilized the fixed blade broadhead . 
A broadhead rotating at high rpms can not plane. that happens at low rpms.


----------



## turbonockguy

Tradbow Guy said:


> If you look at an animals wound channel there isn't a hole bored through them. Its a hole strait through them, when that broadhead hits something its rotation is over with and its going in strait.


When you hit the brakes on your car where does it stop? Right where you hit the brakes or somewhere down the road when the action of the brakes can overcome the momentum
.




This is a video of a deer taken by Randy Oitker. It was shown on the sportsman channel. It was shot with a compound. 4 blade 100 gr muzzy and fletchet arrow with a Turbonockt-4. When Randy dressed the deer they found that the "hole" made it all the way through the second lung.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> When you hit the brakes on your car where does it stop? Right where you hit the brakes or somewhere down the road when the action of the brakes can overcome the momentum
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a video of a deer taken by Randy Oitker. It was shown on the sportsman channel. It was shot with a compound. 4 blade 100 gr muzzy and fletchet arrow with a Turbonockt-4. When Randy dressed the deer they found that the "hole" made it all the way through the second lung.


Theres a hole because its shot with a 4 blade, holes like that are not uncomon 4 blades allows tension release from all directions. Holes like that are also not uncommon on bone shots such as shoulder shots. Im gonna be honest I was on your side when this all first started but you do make a LOT of claims based on nothing I think you need to have a lot more slow motion video to back up all these claims. There is no way an arrow is spinning with enough rotational energy to bore through an animal.


----------



## gnome

Why does the video go grayish at the end? 
Even if you know you are absolutely right about some thing, it is only an opinion until there is real proof.
That video hints at, but doesn't really show any thing.
I would need to see a test in slow motion, shooting into clear ballistic gel, so I could see the wound channel, and rotation. THAT would be proof.
If they can do it for bullets, it can be done for an arrow.


----------



## Shotkizer

I got to hand it to Turbonockguy. He knows how to get a thread going! Lol.


----------



## p508

Since we're on turbonocks- do they work best with right or left wing fletching ?


----------



## gnome

p508 said:


> Since we're on turbonocks- do they work best with right or left wing fletching ?


I'm pretty sure they are right wing only.


----------



## JParanee

Shotkizer said:


> I got to hand it to Turbonockguy. He knows how to get a thread going! Lol.


You ain't kiddng 

I thought I was good


----------



## p508

gnome said:


> I'm pretty sure they are right wing only.


Thanks- I bought a dozen 6 mos ago but never tried them because I heard they require left wing and all my arrows are right wing- maybe I'll give them a go 
when the snow pack drops to less than a foot in my yard-


----------



## DDSHOOTER

P508, look up the thread that Rick did on shooting vanes. 

Joe, just like a merry-go-round. Lol.
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

gnome said:


> Why does the video go grayish at the end?
> Even if you know you are absolutely right about some thing, it is only an opinion until there is real proof.
> That video hints at, but doesn't really show any thing.
> I would need to see a test in slow motion, shooting into clear ballistic gel, so I could see the wound channel, and rotation. THAT would be proof.
> If they can do it for bullets, it can be done for an arrow
> 
> Here is a video done by the Bohning company. Near the middle there is a Gel shot. with a broadhead and Blazers. And it shows something I do not think the Bohning company expected to show.
> YOu may have to look closely at that gel shot two or three times. but you will notice. that the arrow has right hand fletch. when it hits the gell it comes out the other side spinning to the LEFT! If you look closely at e the vanes as they pass through the gel the blazers deform in the gel and actually reverse pitch and cause the arrow to reverse rotation. Seems a lot of folks think an arrow justs stops spinning when it hit something like gel or flesh. Well this goes in spinning right and comes out spinning left.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJoTXRQNDPA
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This next video shows on of my vaned turbonocks going through gel (not for trad)
> Now before anyone yells I cheated! I used a Right offset Badger Broadhead with the Turbonock. Why? It pretty much aerodynamically matches what the Turbo does and
> I wanted to see what this set up would do! I am not on Badger's shooting staff. I do like how this works with my trad bow. and also my compound.
> The video I am posting was done by Alan Teitel. He is not an archer, but a good videographer.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Again I want to explain the gel. The first batch I made I made to the specifications used for bullets. and it was so dense I could not get an arrow to pass through it point blank with my 55lb compound. So I cut the ration of gel to water to a 7% mixture rather than 10%. Now obviously the badger will rotate through the gel. because of the offset. but so did thre
> turbo with offset. The reason I did this was for the compound community. to show that the Turbonock enables you to in effect shoot an animal twice with one arrow.
> I even serrate the leading edge of the vanes. So you have two "broadheads" on one arrow.
> These were shot at 5000 frames per second.
> One more interesting thing for those that are science minded. look carefully at the balloon shots, There seems to be a "vortex" formed that pulls some of the water along with the arrow after it passes through the balloon? One would thing the water would just splash away from the arrow . but it looks like some travels along the shaft and actually rotates with the arrow?????
> I will post another video of this.


----------



## turbonockguy

here is another video of the balloon.




again look at the water as the arrow exits.
It sure looks like the arrow is passing through a vortex?? 
I figure I will get called "stupid" again or things worse. but I have a theory that this may show why broadheads do not plane with turbonock.

That high rotation actually gets the air to swirl much like a tornado. or like water in your commode when you flush.
Liquids and gases are similar when they rotate. they can both create vortexes. we call it a tornado in a gas and a whirlpool in a liquid.
in a whirpool the center is vacant of water and we can see that. liquids move more efficiently when they swirl. and that open area is an area of less pressure.
In a tornado the center of the tornado we say has a vacuum in it that can pic up objects. So that is also an area of less pressure just like a whirlpool.

My thinking . It seems the high rotating broadhead is spinning fast enough to create a mini tornado which causes an area of less dense airflow for the rest of the shaft to fly through. So I am thinking what you see in tre video is some of that water also moving through the less dense air along the shaft. If you look closely you can see
There seems to be a boundary about a half inch away from the arrow shaft and the rotating water pretty much stays inside that boundary.
also there is a vortex of swirling water trailing the back of the turbonock?? 
an analogy. they put vortex tabs on the trailing edges of jet aircraft wings to "bleed" the airflow off the wings more efrficiently?????????????

I know I am not a scientist or an engineer. and perhaps there is another explanation for this vortex in the slo mo video????
I have on my crash helmet and my flack vest!


----------



## Tradbow Guy

The first video shows the arrow clearly not rotating when going through the wood. It also shows the broadhead of the arrow clearly not rotating when coming out of the gel, the rotation you see in the OPPOSITE direction as you pointed out was caused when the fletching were exiting the gel, it was imparted onto the fletching end. The gel you "mixed for bullets" was not "mixed for bullets" the recipe is to simulate flesh, not to withstand bullet impacts. When you changed it to a weaker consistancy you no longer simulate flesh. The entire point was that it doesnt spin with enough force to drill through an animal, not that it doesnt spin with enough force to drill through jell-0. Why do you have so much trouble doing propper tests? Also, why did you not fire a non-turbo nock arrow through the gel for comparison? Which is generally what you do when trying to make a case for your product.


----------



## turbonockguy

Tradbow Guy said:


> The first video shows the arrow clearly not rotating when going through the wood. It also shows the broadhead of the arrow clearly not rotating when coming out of the gel, the rotation you see in the OPPOSITE direction as you pointed out was caused when the fletching were exiting the gel, it was imparted onto the fletching end. The gel you "mixed for bullets" was not "mixed for bullets" the recipe is to simulate flesh, not to withstand bullet impacts. When you changed it to a weaker consistancy you no longer simulate flesh. The entire point was that it doesnt spin with enough force to drill through an animal, not that it doesnt spin with enough force to drill through jell-0. Why do you have so much trouble doing propper tests? Also, why did you not fire a non-turbo nock arrow through the gel for comparison? Which is generally what you do when trying to make a case for your product.


You should look at the videos again. use the you tube settings to slow the video down more. You seem to be seeing what you want to see.
I actually used a turbonock in the gel video that I did. It is called the stealth. It has the same twist as the t-4 nock that can be used for trad shooting but has vanes 
included on the nock.
You asked to see more slowmotion and I provided you with some. I have a few more I will try to get posted sometime today. they are not the quality of Alans but they are int4eresting.

The gel designed for bullets you are correct is designed to simulate flesh. As I stated you can not get a pass through in the gel consistency designed for bullets.
I am sure the gel Bohning used was also not ballistic grade. If you go on you tube you can see videos of some archers shooting into ballistic grade gel and do not get pass throughs. There is a problem with using ballistic gel for arrows. and that is that bullets are short. arrows are long. so you get massive friction on the shaft itself which stops the forward motion of the arrow. In an animal like a deer you rarely shoot through 8 inches of material as dense as gel. the organs in a deer have different densities. and I can shoot through deer with my arrows and do others.

So basically that gel density is used by the FBI and police , etc as a standard for measuring bullet performance. These same groups also test bullets on pig cadavers
to get more realistic results.
I did shoot that arrow through 16 inches of "jello" That jello had the consistency of animal fat. So that shot would be similar to shooting through an obese bear.
If you want I can show you a video of a pass through through about a 400 lb living bear. Now it does not count as a legitimate test in as much as the bear was not synthetic but real. and bled out in about 45 yds.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

None of this is scientific. None. The gel test could of been conducted with either a heavier projectile or more force behind the arrow to get a pass thru. Nick, said he is not a scientist or engineer. He is just producing video's that buyer want to see. I can question the pouring/mixing/mold/curing of the gel all day long. Even if I produce 8 casting each one would require destructive test to be valid. Kind of like lighting a book of matches. Even at that I DON'T Think this is anything like an animal's body. IT's a gel test with a arrow.
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

DDSHOOTER said:


> None of this is scientific. None. The gel test could of been conducted with either a heavier projectile or more force behind the arrow to get a pass thru. Nick, said he is not a scientist or engineer. He is just producing video's that buyer want to see. I can question the pouring/mixing/mold/curing of the gel all day long. Even if I produce 8 casting each one would require destructive test to be valid. Kind of like lighting a book of matches. Even at that I DON'T Think this is anything like an animal's body. IT's a gel test with a arrow.
> Dan


I agree with just about everything you said. except .I did those videos because I wanted to see what happened. I did the gel test with a less dense gel because I wanted to see if the Turbonock Stealth would rotate through a dense material. Again ,as I stated. The ballistic gel as it is made for bullet testing was of no value to me. because it stopped the arrow before the fletching could get to the gel. and I wanted to see what the stealth nock would do in as I stated a dense material.
In real hunting situations that nock passes through animals. and acts as a second broadhead. So I needed a material that would at least allow a pass through so I could see what was happening. I can not see inside an animal as it is being shot, But I do know that my Stealth, and Vortex in most cases do not hinder the pass through , and enhance the wound by cutting an additional wound path. You can see that happening in the gel shot. It may not be to standards used for bullets, It gives the best Info I can gather as to what happens to an animal hit with that nock.( The stealth is not for trad)
I am attaching an un scientific still photo of a 12 year olds first kill. I was on the hunt. The young man hit the deer in the right side of the neck ( bad Shot) the arrow went on the inside of the shoulder then the outside of the ribcage just under the skin. When we got to him he was standing where the shot was. His dad had instructed him to wait and let the deer settle down. They gave me the honor of tracking the animal. I followed the blood trail up about an 8 ft bank. and looked down the other side. and there it was. 15yard bleed out.


----------



## ismo131

Oo what? Why arrow need to spin when broadhead is thrue deer. Or gel


----------



## turbonockguy

ismo131 said:


> Oo what? Why arrow need to spin when broadhead is thrue deer. Or gel


Why not spin it through deer. possibly to cause more trauma? more humane kills.


----------



## BarneySlayer

turbonockguy said:


> When you hit the brakes on your car where does it stop? Right where you hit the brakes or somewhere down the road when the action of the brakes can overcome the momentum
> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is a video of a deer taken by Randy Oitker. It was shown on the sportsman channel. It was shot with a compound. 4 blade 100 gr muzzy and fletchet arrow with a Turbonockt-4. When Randy dressed the deer they found that the "hole" made it all the way through the second lung.


So?

I shot a deer and not only did the arrow put a hole all the way through the deer, but the arrow never stopped, and buried itself halfway into a foam target laying on the ground in my yard that the deer happened to be standing in front of. Does that prove that my bow, or the rest of my hardware is superior?

Of course not.


----------



## Matt_Potter

If I was going to hunt water buffalo I'd get all hot and bothered about penetration but for anything in the US - 45-50 lbs - 7-10 GPP - a well tuned arrow - any sharp broadhead that flips your switch - you are good to go.

Matt


----------



## turbonockguy

Bruce Lee once was talking about fighting. I do not remember the exact quote but it goes something like this.
You can practice fighting, you can talk about fighting , you can watch fighting, but if you want to learn to fight you must fight.
Some of you here spend so much time arguing about whether turbos do this or that or whether I am a crook or just stupid or whatever.
That is all talk and conjecture.

I have made this offer to the compound community and I will make it again here.
Buy a pack of nocks. If you like them Keep them, If you do not Send them back for a refund! then you can objectively tell everyone here just how much you do not like them. or you can do as some have already done here. that you do like them. Is it not strange that virtually no one responds to the positive posts by turbonocks shooters?

Then you can decide for yourself whether they work or not.


----------



## Sanford

Turbonock, I don't even use broadheads and the whole bore a hole thing is simply silly from a common sense standpoint.

Have you ever seen one of those rubber bladded fans spinning at a high rate of speed, where you simple touch the burring blades lightly with your finger and it stops dead cold. With the arrow spin you are talking, you ain't even got a mere fraction of that energy going on. Both forces, the fan blade or the arrow, will have to stop when they meet resistance equal or greater than they.

I know you state 4000-7000 rpm depending on speed traveling, but that's a false mathematical extrapolation. Looks good in advertising mode but completely false in what's happening. You have 24 revolutions in 20 yards. That's it.

To get the energy of stopping 4000 rpm, you have be going 4000 rpm when impact happens. Even if it magically could be buzzing that fast when it hit, the mass involved is miniscule comparatively to the mass it hits.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Nick, all we're saying is it's really not hard to open up a wound channel with a sharp point. The wider the point the bigger the cut. So, the hard Vanes version (not being used by the Trad archer) has no meaning. You should of shown the test were the arrow stopped inside the harder gel pack. Dissecting the gel block to see the channel is evidence. 
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

I recently received an e-mail from Rick Barbee and with his permission I am posting it here.
=========================================================================================================

Hey Nick

Just an FYI for some additional information.

My bow has an 8.5" brace height measured from the string to the throat of the grip.
From the string to the shelf measures 7.75"

The turbonock arrows rotate a full 90 degrees in that short distance.











Think about it. That's 90 degrees of rotation before the fletching even reaches pass.
Most arrows do not start any rotation until they are at least 5ft past the bow.

I discovered this by using lipstick on the fletching. I was shooting cock fletch in at 90 degrees/3 O'clock to the riser,
I put lipstick on that cock fletch. The lipstick trail it left was at 6 O'clock. A full 90 degrees of rotation to the right.

Shooting vanes with standard nocks I was always able to achieve clearance with cock fletch in.
With the turbonocks I have to shoot cock fletch out due to the rotation.

Pretty cool.

Just thought you would find this interesting. 8^)

Rick


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Again. There are all kind of opinions floating around here. If you want to find out for your self at no rise. Buy a pack of nocks. if you do not like them send them back.
I believe I had two packs returned last year. one without any comment. the other , they did not fit the shafts .


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> You should look at the videos again. use the you tube settings to slow the video down more. You seem to be seeing what you want to see.
> I actually used a turbonock in the gel video that I did. It is called the stealth. It has the same twist as the t-4 nock that can be used for trad shooting but has vanes
> included on the nock.
> You asked to see more slowmotion and I provided you with some. I have a few more I will try to get posted sometime today. they are not the quality of Alans but they are int4eresting.
> 
> The gel designed for bullets you are correct is designed to simulate flesh. As I stated you can not get a pass through in the gel consistency designed for bullets.
> I am sure the gel Bohning used was also not ballistic grade. If you go on you tube you can see videos of some archers shooting into ballistic grade gel and do not get pass throughs. There is a problem with using ballistic gel for arrows. and that is that bullets are short. arrows are long. so you get massive friction on the shaft itself which stops the forward motion of the arrow. In an animal like a deer you rarely shoot through 8 inches of material as dense as gel. the organs in a deer have different densities. and I can shoot through deer with my arrows and do others.
> 
> So basically that gel density is used by the FBI and police , etc as a standard for measuring bullet performance. These same groups also test bullets on pig cadavers
> to get more realistic results.
> I did shoot that arrow through 16 inches of "jello" That jello had the consistency of animal fat. So that shot would be similar to shooting through an obese bear.
> If you want I can show you a video of a pass through through about a 400 lb living bear. Now it does not count as a legitimate test in as much as the bear was not synthetic but real. and bled out in about 45 yds.


You mis-read my first statement I said non-turbo nock. To show that an arrow without a turbo nock would not perform as well through the gel that is what people want to see, side by side slow-motion comparisons. I see what i see my friend, I have no bias toward your product, I am always looking for innovation I was one of the very early users of the FOBS when most thought they were gimics but you gotta give me some real data here, im not just asking to see this stuff for no reason if you show me your product works i'll be using it thats my point.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

turbonockguy said:


> I agree with just about everything you said. except .I did those videos because I wanted to see what happened. I did the gel test with a less dense gel because I wanted to see if the Turbonock Stealth would rotate through a dense material. Again ,as I stated. The ballistic gel as it is made for bullet testing was of no value to me. because it stopped the arrow before the fletching could get to the gel.
> View attachment 2153491


But you missed the point, the propper mixed gel replicates flesh, we wanted to see it be able to spin through flesh as you claimed, even if the entire arrow doesnt blow out of the back, no one expects that, half the time bullets dont blow out the back, if it spins through flesh as you claim the fletching is irrelivant.


----------



## ranchoarcher

Ok, I saw how the blazers were rotating in the opposite direction coming out of the gel from the direction seen in most other shots made. I couldn't really tell what the direction of rotation was before it went in during the actual shot segment. If the following segment which appears to be sold as the same shot from a different angle, yeah, it is spinning in the opposite direction. I'd wager it's not the same arrow or shot. The vane would encounter a higher level of resistance from gel than air to force it to a rotation matching the vane angle and arrow speed. They do have you beat on one count. You need to get some pyrotechnics in your vids and bow some stuff up.


----------



## Easykeeper

turbonockguy said:


> here is another video of the balloon.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> again look at the water as the arrow exits.
> It sure looks like the arrow is passing through a vortex??
> I figure I will get called "stupid" again or things worse. but I have a theory that this may show why broadheads do not plane with turbonock.
> 
> That high rotation actually gets the air to swirl much like a tornado. or like water in your commode when you flush.
> Liquids and gases are similar when they rotate. they can both create vortexes. we call it a tornado in a gas and a whirlpool in a liquid.
> in a whirpool the center is vacant of water and we can see that. liquids move more efficiently when they swirl. and that open area is an area of less pressure.
> In a tornado the center of the tornado we say has a vacuum in it that can pic up objects. So that is also an area of less pressure just like a whirlpool.
> 
> My thinking . It seems the high rotating broadhead is spinning fast enough to create a mini tornado which causes an area of less dense airflow for the rest of the shaft to fly through. So I am thinking what you see in tre video is some of that water also moving through the less dense air along the shaft. If you look closely you can see
> There seems to be a boundary about a half inch away from the arrow shaft and the rotating water pretty much stays inside that boundary.
> also there is a vortex of swirling water trailing the back of the turbonock??
> an analogy. they put *vortex tabs* on the trailing edges of jet aircraft wings to "bleed" the airflow off the wings more efrficiently?????????????
> 
> I know I am not a scientist or an engineer. and perhaps there is another explanation for this vortex in the slo mo video????
> I have on my crash helmet and my flack vest!


Vortex tab? What the heck is a vortex tab? 

If you mean winglet, they are on the wing tips, not the trailing edge. They are there partly to reduce wingtip vortices as air from the high pressure underside of the wing tries to escape to the low pressure upper side of the wing, which reduces lift and induces drag. The effect is complicated but results in an increased lift to drag ratio and possibly a forward force on the wing. The result is greater range and fuel savings.

What does that have to do with arrow flight? 



And the guy in the video actually says that only Turbonock equipped arrows spin...:doh: 

I'm not seeing anything in that video that wouldn't be there with any spinning arrow, Turbonock or not. 

And what does shooting through a water balloon show anyway other than the usually unseen effects of fluid dynamics though the use of slow motion? How does it in any way show anything that might happen as an arrow passes through a deer? In fact, shooting a non-spinning arrow through a water balloon and filming it in slow motion would itself look pretty cool. Wouldn't prove anything but it would still be interesting.

In my opinion it's nothing more than an advertising gimmick. Like rancho said, you need to shoot something that will blow up, that'll do a good job of illustrating the devastating wound channel produced by Turbonocks.

I wish I could leave this thread alone, and I'm really trying, but the laughable pseudoscience keeps pulling me back...:BangHead:





> That high rotation actually gets the air to swirl much like a tornado. or like water in your commode when you flush.


Swirling stuff going down a commode, there's an good analogy for the exaggerated claims in this thread ...:chortle:


----------



## turbonockguy

all I can say is click on that you tube video. then just before it starts. click on the round settings button. Looks like a gear. then click on speed and you can slow the video down to .25 of what it is. Look at the liquid roataing with the arrow and the "vortex like" shape of the water trail. and think.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> all I can say is click on that you tube video. then just before it starts. click on the round settings button. Looks like a gear. then click on speed and you can slow the video down to .25 of what it is. Look at the liquid roataing with the arrow and the "vortex like" shape of the water trail. and think.


The basic problem is again, with energy, there is no free lunch. If there was, we all would be using perpetual machines. Even if it had created a vortex of complete vacuum, the energy loss to create it would be greater than any gain from it. It's a basic principle no one has ever overcome.


----------



## turbonockguy

This is a video from you tube shooting through a commercial grade of ballistic gel.
It was done by Robert Wood. 2014 Arkansa State champ.


----------



## turbonockguy

Here is another shooting through deer bone and commercial grade gel


----------



## turbonockguy

one more. if you go to youtube an type in ripfletching he has a bunch of videos .pretty interesting.


----------



## Huntinsker

This ripfletching guy's videos are worse than turbonockguy's. Absolutely worthless stuff. Comparing penetration of broadheads without mentioning the arrow weight or even using the same shafts. For all we know, he may have arrows that weigh 100gr more or less than the others.


----------



## BarneySlayer

Anybody want to bet me $5 that neither Hank nor I ever see the magic BS bow after the weather clears? I take Paypal


----------



## Tradbow Guy

this whole thread is filled with deceptive testing, its a waste of space.


----------



## Aronnax

Tradbow Guy said:


> this whole thread is filled with deceptive testing, its a waste of space.


Esp. since we've learned nothing about the much hyped "new type of carbon limb". 

New how? Different shape? Don't see any pics. New materials? Carbon has been done. There was I think carbon/ceramic mentioned, but are these porsche 911 brake rotors? What do the ceramics offer to a recurve limb? It was told they were lighter than conventional limbs, but nothing more was given. How light are they? Tip weight? Comparable conventional limbs? Still no dfc or efficiency numbers. 

But, what we did get was a lot of arguing over turbo-nocks, pseudo science, and logical fallacies, with some inflammatory name calling thrown in for good measure.

Either post something relevant to the topic of this thread, or someone should get the mods to lock it.

Is the infamous bow at least on it's way to Hank for some proper testing?

BM


----------



## turbonockguy

Aronnax said:


> Esp. since we've learned nothing about the much hyped "new type of carbon limb".
> 
> New how? Different shape? Don't see any pics. New materials? Carbon has been done. There was I think carbon/ceramic mentioned, but are these porsche 911 brake rotors? What do the ceramics offer to a recurve limb? It was told they were lighter than conventional limbs, but nothing more was given. How light are they? Tip weight? Comparable conventional limbs? Still no dfc or efficiency numbers.
> 
> But, what we did get was a lot of arguing over turbo-nocks, pseudo science, and logical fallacies, with some inflammatory name calling thrown in for good measure.
> 
> Either post something relevant to the topic of this thread, or someone should get the mods to lock it.
> 
> Is the infamous bow at least on it's way to Hank for some proper testing?
> 
> BM


Arvid Developed a proprietary process where he bonds a ceramic material with the carbon. This makes the carbon more stable and also more rigid. I think if you go to blackswanarchery.com you can perhaps get some more information. ( just remember everything on that site is hype and a lie) ?????????????????????? According to some who have posted here.
Just remember which direction the inflammatory posts came from. not that good or evil changes anything.

At the very least this thread shows a problem with the way we communicate. when we can hide behind made up names. I have been posting on this site since almost its inception. With my real name (nick snook) I changed it to turbonockguy when I became a sponsor.

I have contacted Hank. and have not set a date for him to test or even if he will. I first want to shoot in sunlight outdoors myself. I know this will mean nothing to most here but that is what I am going to do.
If I can work something out with Hank , Fine!!


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> Anybody want to bet me $5 that neither Hank nor I ever see the magic BS bow after the weather clears? I take Paypal


I will bet you $15,000 it will!


----------



## Sanford

Turbo, can you elaborate on your website advertising? That is, where an arrow that spins 24 revolutions in 60 feet is spinning up to 5,000 rpm's, so a broadhead will "make a unique large round entrance wound." as stated.

The way I see it, what's really happening, if speed were constant, is that the arrow might spin 5,000 times after one minute in the air, and over 3 miles down the road. Much different in abstract than a "rate of spin", which is rpm's. Spinning 5,000 rpm's doesn't even require the arrow travel anywhere - it is doing "revolutions per minute". I can see how that abstract meaning was distorted, though.

Taking that 24 revolutions in 60 feet used to math out the abstract in rpm's, a little over 1/3 turn per foot, how does a broadhead make this hole when a deer is barely a foot wide?

This little math extrapolation used to tout the rpm's has always bugged me in use.


----------



## Aronnax

Huntinsker said:


> This ripfletching guy's videos are worse than turbonockguy's. Absolutely worthless stuff. Comparing penetration of broadheads without mentioning the arrow weight or even using the same shafts. For all we know, he may have arrows that weigh 100gr more or less than the others.


I finally watched one of those, and the one thing that it proved in my mind, is that ballistic gelatin is a poor analogy of living tissue when testing arrows. It may be just fine for bullets, but the dynamics of a bullet in living tissue is completely different than that of an arrow. How can I say that? His block in one of those videos is maybe 6" thick and the arrows barely poke out the backside. How thick is a deer, and how far in the dirt would you expect your arrow to be sticking in the dirt behind the animal on a good clean shot?

I think the difference comes down to lubricity. I've not handled ballistic gelatin but I imagine it's not as slippery against the sides of the arrow shaft as the bloody carcass of an animal.

BM


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Aronnax said:


> I finally watched one of those, and the one thing that it proved in my mind, is that ballistic gelatin is a poor analogy of living tissue when testing arrows. It may be just fine for bullets, but the dynamics of a bullet in living tissue is completely different than that of an arrow. How can I say that? His block in one of those videos is maybe 6" thick and the arrows barely poke out the backside. How thick is a deer, and how far in the dirt would you expect your arrow to be sticking in the dirt behind the animal on a good clean shot?
> 
> I think the difference comes down to lubricity. I've not handled ballistic gelatin but I imagine it's not as slippery against the sides of the arrow shaft as the bloody carcass of an animal.
> 
> BM


it simulates flesh not the cavity inside of an animal, it is ment to simulate flesh, not a deers anatomy. It basically simulates a proportionately sized hunk of muscle.


----------



## Aronnax

Tradbow Guy said:


> it simulates flesh not the cavity inside of an animal, it is ment to simulate flesh, not a deers anatomy. It basically simulates a proportionately sized hunk of muscle.


Still though, people have made above the spine shots through all that thick shoulder muscle and still get a a clean pass through; see it in the bowhunting forum every now and then. It may simulate the density of muscle, but I don't think it simulates the lubricity of living muscle. But again, that's just my hypothesis.

BM


----------



## turbonockguy

Tradbow Guy said:


> it simulates flesh not the cavity inside of an animal, it is ment to simulate flesh, not a deers anatomy. It basically simulates a proportionately sized hunk of muscle.


That is why I used a less dense gel ,but 16 inches of it! I wanted to see what a pass through looked like. In as much as I am not an engineer I grew up in a family of engineers. and I did learn a little. Ballistic gel is basically a standard used to stop bullets. so all the govt agencies that use it can compare results.
A bullet is at most 1 inch long. not counting 50cal. and an arrow shaft is approx 28 inches long. that shaft can not do a pass through on standardized ballistic gel.
as Robert Wood showed in his video. 
I know as well as most of you that arrows pass through deer. I did my test to see what happened to my Turbonock Stealth as it passed through 16 inches of gel
would it hang up? would it stop rotating? or would it cut an additional rotating wound path? Well in the video with my "pseudo Scientific test" The arrow did not hang up. It did continue to rotate. and in doing so it caused a secondary rotating wound path. I would think that would be a positive thing for a hunting arrow.
That nock does not work with Trad setups. unless you have a very large window and can use a whisker biscuit or a fall away.


----------



## Huntinsker

Aronnax said:


> Still though, people have made above the spine shots through all that thick shoulder muscle and still get a a clean pass through; see it in the bowhunting forum every now and then. It may simulate the density of muscle, but I don't think it simulates the lubricity of living muscle. But again, that's just my hypothesis.
> 
> BM


The gel that he used is much more dense than it should have been if he were using it as a fleshy analog. The gel that's formulated for bullet testing is much less dense than what he used and it is actually a pretty good substitute for human or animal flesh. The only thing the gel in his was good for was to be used as a consistent medium. That is until he shot it several times.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> Turbo, can you elaborate on your website advertising? That is, where an arrow that spins 24 revolutions in 60 feet is spinning up to 5,000 rpm's, so a broadhead will "make a unique large round entrance wound." as stated.
> 
> The way I see it, what's really happening, if speed were constant, is that the arrow might spin 5,000 times after one minute in the air, and over 3 miles down the road. Much different in abstract than a "rate of spin", which is rpm's. Spinning 5,000 rpm's doesn't even require the arrow travel anywhere - it is doing "revolutions per minute". I can see how that abstract meaning was distorted, though.
> 
> Taking that 24 revolutions in 60 feet used to math out the abstract in rpm's, a little over 1/3 turn per foot, how does a broadhead make this hole when a deer is barely a foot wide?
> 
> This little math extrapolation used to tout the rpm's has always bugged me in use.


I can not give you a math answer. but I can show you the Hole!


----------



## turbonockguy

Huntinsker said:


> The gel that he used is much more dense than it should have been if he were using it as a fleshy analog. The gel that's formulated for bullet testing is much less dense than what he used and it is actually a pretty good substitute for human or animal flesh. The only thing the gel in his was good for was to be used as a consistent medium. That is until he shot it several times.


The gel that Robet Wood used!
Actually that clear gel is the top of the line commercial stuff used for testing bullets.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> I can not give you a math answer. but I can show you the Hole!


At some point you determined the arrow was spinning 5000-8000 rpms and drilling an entry hole by the broadhead. You got the number somehow, as it's on your website. You say it all the time in reference to the hole and to the spinning energy. Just showing that when some folks say there's hype, there's hype.

Really doesn't matter though, as I think most folks with decent intelligence know the difference between something that "spun" 5000 times after over 3 miles travel and one minute in the air, and something "spinning" 5000 times per minute. Cute marketing if you had a dumb enough audience. Why can't you just be upfront, or why does Black Swan advertise his bows at 300 fps?


----------



## Easykeeper

Sanford said:


> Turbo, can you elaborate on your website advertising? That is, where an arrow that spins 24 revolutions in 60 feet is spinning up to 5,000 rpm's, so a broadhead will "make a unique large round entrance wound." as stated.
> 
> The way I see it, what's really happening, if speed were constant, is that the arrow might spin 5,000 times after one minute in the air, and over 3 miles down the road. Much different in abstract than a "rate of spin", which is rpm's. Spinning 5,000 rpm's doesn't even require the arrow travel anywhere - it is doing "revolutions per minute". I can see how that abstract meaning was distorted, though.
> 
> Taking that 24 revolutions in 60 feet used to math out the abstract in rpm's, a little over 1/3 turn per foot, *how does a broadhead make this hole when a deer is barely a foot wide?*
> 
> This little math extrapolation used to tout the rpm's has always bugged me in use.


It's spin, pun intended...:wink:

Arrows do spin as they go through a deer, the angular momentum keeps them spinning _temporarily_ until it's overcome, just like linear momentum keeps them moving downrange. Lots of things can stop, or increase any rotation as a broadhead passes through an animal. I'd think hitting a bone would have quite an influence, depending on the bone and the angle relative to the blade. 

I would certainly hope that none of the broadheads in the video are singe edge heads since their claimed "self-rotating" feature would only cloud the devastating effects of the Turbonock as it bores it's deadly hole. 


My opinion is that the numbers put up in these threads about Turbonocks, at least regarding _downrange_ spin (angular velocity) would only hold true in a vacuum. 

I have no reason to question that the often quoted initial angular velocity for an arrow equipped with a Turbonock is accurate; it equates to 4363.6 rpm for a 180 fps arrow (7200 rpm for a 300 fps arrow). However, in all of the videos that I've seen of Turbonocks it looks like the arrow is spinning much faster than would be produced by a non-Turbonock equipped arrow traveling at the same speed with traditional fletching with the same degree of offset. 

I believe that a Turbonock equipped arrow, since it's operating in a fluid, will _decrease_ it's spin until eventually it's spinning no faster than a non-Turbonock equipped arrow with the same degree of offset to the fletching. And it does it for the same reasons that an arrow without a Turbonock _increases_ it's angular rotation, drag. Eventually, it all comes down to velocity and the angle of attack of the fletching. The physics principles work both ways. 

It's another extrapolation thing, like the chart posted earlier. You can't infer downrange angular velocity by initial angular velocity unless you are shooting arrows in a vacuum. And boring holes in animals? Please...

And no, I don't have the specific fluid dynamic skills to say exactly where either an arrow with a conventional nock or one with a Turbonock reaches equilibrium without a lot of calculation. Fluid dynamics is complicated, and frankly I don't want to do it (if I could).

I can say that the angular velocity of an arrow is ultimately a function of velocity and fletching offset and not of initial angular velocity. The ultimate in low drag would be an arrow launched with exactly the same spin as it would eventually develop by drag alone. In effect you would eliminate drag from the outset. It could very well be that the Turbonock, is too much of a good thing. While I applaud the idea, I don't buy the hype and advertising rhetoric. 

If you really want to make some meaningful videos, and I am writing this in all seriousness, set up your ultra-slow motion camera downrange, say at 20, 30, and 40 yards. Shoot identical arrows from the same bow, one with a regular nock, one with a Turbonock. Make sure the fletching and angle of offset or helical is identical, really should shoot the same arrow and just swap nocks.

I think it would be interesting.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> At some point you determined the arrow was spinning 5000-8000 rpms and drilling an entry hole by the broadhead. You got the number somehow, as it's on your website. You say it all the time in reference to the hole and to the spinning energy. Just showing that when some folks say there's hype, there's hype.
> 
> Really doesn't matter though, as I think most folks with decent intelligence know the difference between something that "spun" 5000 times after over 3 miles travel and one minute in the air, and something "spinning" 5000 times per minute. Cute marketing if you had a dumb enough audience. Why can't you just be upfront, or why does Black Swan advertise his bows at 300 fps?



the reason I explained the rotational speed in rpms because for most people that makes some sense in reference to what they experience in life without doing math.Just about everyone knows 5000 rpms is really fast, I got those rpms by taking the 24 rotations in 60 ft and figuring what that would be at different arrow speeds.
When you explain to someone that most common fletched arrows 2 to 4 degree offset will rotate two times in 20 yds and the turbonock rotates 24 times.
It just does not sink in just how profound that difference is. but when you give someone numbers like 400 rpm vs 5000 rpm , they can instantly understand the difference.
No hype just an explaination that is easily grasped. 

I know I will get jumped on for this but I will be out front and open here. I am not good at math. I can understand theories an concepts as long as I can get non math analogies. In 1958 The year after sputnick went up.Our govt started gifted programs in just about all american schools.
I believe I was in 4th grade and took a standardized IQ test. I had real problems with the math , but one section was reading problems and solving them. They were fun to do. I ended up the the first gifted class. I failed algebra in 7th grade, passed it in 8th. I passed algebra 2 because I was on track team. I was failing 
Chemistry horribly in 9th grade. The teacher told me the only way he would pass me was if I did an acceptable final project. I made and tested various fuels in simple liquid fuel rockets I made from 30.06 shells. I passed.
When I invent things the vision comes first. I make it work then have someone else do the math. 
When I showed my brother who was an engineer for Raytheon , my first turbonock prototypes and let him shoot them. He just looked at me and asked me how did I ever figure out that it would work. I told him I grew up in the same archery-gun shop as he did. Why did he not figure out how to do it? He laughed.
My patent Attorney who is also an aerospace engineer asked me the same question. I gave him the same question in return.

Many years ago I was sitting in an office at MIT having a conversation with Buckminster (Bucky) Fuller. I showed him a photo of a geodesic dome I had my elementary students build and decorate. Bucky was the inventor of the geodesic dome. He looked at the photo and described it as a two frequency,three frequency , alternating , truncated dome. and then asked me how did I figure out the chord factors. I asked him what is a chord?
He started laughing. 
He then told me a story that changed my life. He told me you should be an inventor as well as a sculptor. and then explained,
He was legally blind. when he was a child his mother would let him play in the back yard where he would basically go around and inspect things he found. He would have to hold objects just a few inches from his face to see any details. He once found a praying mantis nest and was amazed how strong is was for being so light and small.
The knowledge of that experience later in life led to his inventing the geodesic dome. He smiled at me and said the idea comes first , then the math.

that is basically why the turbonock exists. I had an idea , why not put rifling on arrows? I did some experiments and it worked. I then took my experimental nocks to an engineer and had them refined and had a prototype made. It worked. For some reason they still work. 

Some folks call them silly. Some folks break world records with them. Go figure. 
If you would like to try them to see if they work for you . I will give you the same deal as anyone else. Try them . If you do not like them send them back.
If that is hype. I apologize !!


----------



## Beendare

Tradbow Guy said:


> this whole thread is filled with deceptive testing, its a waste of space.


Yep......and it will probably quoted for years...and repeated as fact! grin

I do know that if you wipe your arrow shafts down with oil or a lubricant they penetrate Ballistic gel better.


----------



## Easykeeper

I must be living in another universe. Even with my advanced middle aged eyes, it's pretty easy to see that my helically fletched arrows are making more than two revolutions between me and a twenty yard target. 

Of course it could just be hallucination.


----------



## Tradbow Guy

Easykeeper said:


> I must be living in another universe. Even with my advanced middle aged eyes, it's pretty easy to see that my helically fletched arrows are making more than two revolutions between me and a twenty yard target.
> 
> Of course it could just be hallucination.


thats the problem here, deception, tests made to make turbonocks and black swan bows look good rather then based on real science.


----------



## Matt_Potter

But will they kill a mushroom???


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> the reason I explained the rotational speed in rpms because for most people that makes some sense in reference to what they experience in life without doing math.Just about everyone knows 5000 rpms is really fast, I got those rpms by taking the 24 rotations in 60 ft and figuring what that would be at different arrow speeds.
> When you explain to someone that most common fletched arrows 2 to 4 degree offset will rotate two times in 20 yds and the turbonock rotates 24 times.
> It just does not sink in just how profound that difference is. but when you give someone numbers like 400 rpm vs 5000 rpm , they can instantly understand the difference.
> No hype just an explaination that is easily grasped.


Yeah, that's what's evident. The problem with it is that RPM is the rotation of the shaft per minute. It is not dependent on how far or fast the shaft travels other than it's circumference distance. When you extrapolate the 5000 spins based on distance traveled and time, that's fine. But, when you come back to 60 feet, you have to state it the same way. 5000 revolutions over 3 miles is the same as ~.4 (4 tenths) over one foot. To make your hole, you use the 3 mile spin as a rate at near -0- distance.

For you entrance hole depth, that's only a fraction of an inch. Over the cross-section of a deer, that's less than half one full turn - so, your entrance slice and exit slice, assuming no slow down at all, would only be off by less than one half a full turn.

At some point, I might take up some of your nocks. I have nothing against them, don't know anything about them other than only one tiny sliver of possibility, of which, I think might be with stabilization preferences. The rest of the stuff????


----------



## turbonockguy

I just thought I would post this again . some people argued that the broadhead caused the rotation. others discounted this video because it was only Jello not ballistic gel. 
I saw the arrow making two rotational wound tracks through the gel. one with the broadhead. ( offset blades) the other with the turbonock. (offset blades?) 
If this is fraud or hype.? I see what I see.
Some people argue in mathematical terms and I understand that. I do not think in mathematical terms. I think visually.
When I do an experiment I need visual proof. 
For years people have posted that an arrow stops rotation as soon as it hits an animal. 
All I as is watch the video and perhaps think.
I honestly believe what I see here is an improvement to our sport. at the very least this can contribute to more humane kills. 
What is strange with this thread , is virtually no one has brought up the question of accuracy. This usually happens.
I think only one person claimed that he can shoot great distances accurately without any spin.


----------



## turbonockguy

Easykeeper said:


> I must be living in another universe. Even with my advanced middle aged eyes, it's pretty easy to see that my helically fletched arrows are making more than two revolutions between me and a twenty yard target.
> 
> Of course it could just be hallucination.


I had explained this before. I made that claim based on what most compound shooters use. a conventional common fletched arrow for a compound uses about a 2 to 4 degree offset. and you get about 2 revolutions in 20 yds.
Obviously a high helical big fletch will spin faster.
Do you middle aged eyes also see the speed loss your helical fletched arrows are going through? I am sure you are satisfied with your set up. 
I like to experiment with my setups. and have found that the mechanical stabilization allows my arrow to fly with less fletching. which reduces drag and drift in cross wind. and allows more energy to transfer to the target.
The more helical you use the faster your arrow spins. and the straighter it flies, but you pay a price, speed loss.
The turbonock spins you arrow instantly ,Since the arrow is spinning you only need enough fletch and offset to keep it spinning. My Turbonock Stealth will fly any modern fixed blade broadhead. with only 1.6 square inch of vane area.
The broadhead will not plane. As long as the vane area is larger than the area of the blades on the broadhead this works.
The t-4 nock used with a fletched arrow will allow you to reduce the offset you use.and reduce the size feathers you are shooting and get a faster more accurate arrow that delivers more energy to the target.
Remember your fletched arrow leaves the bow with 0 rotation. it requires energy to start the rotation and once the arrow is spinning all the feather is a liability. It slows the arrow down faster. 
It make sense to me to initiate rotation right as the arrow leaves the bowstring. 
For basically the same reason bullets spin even before they leave the gun barrel.


----------



## turbonockguy

turbonockguy said:


> I just thought I would post this again . some people argued that the broadhead caused the rotation. others discounted this video because it was only Jello not ballistic gel.
> I saw the arrow making two rotational wound tracks through the gel. one with the broadhead. ( offset blades) the other with the turbonock. (offset blades?)
> If this is fraud or hype.? I see what I see.
> Some people argue in mathematical terms and I understand that. I do not think in mathematical terms. I think visually.
> When I do an experiment I need visual proof.
> For years people have posted that an arrow stops rotation as soon as it hits an animal.
> All I ask is watch the video and perhaps think.
> I honestly believe what I see here is an improvement to our sport. at the very least this can contribute to more humane kills.
> What is strange with this thread , is virtually no one has brought up the question of accuracy. This usually happens.
> I think only one person claimed that he can shoot great distances accurately without any spin.


OOPS I forgot to post the video.


----------



## CAPTJJ

I was curious to see what an arrow spinning at 4000 rpms would look like, my cordless drill only does 1500.


----------



## Matt_Potter

How fast do you need to spin to kill at horse apple??


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> OOPS I forgot to post the video.


Video is a little pointless unless you have a control to compare. 

Do four tests:
normal nock, double bevel head. 
normal nock, single bevel head.
turbonock, double bevel head.
turbonock, single bevel head.

And as is with everything scientific ALL ELSE MUST REMAIN EQUAL. I don't think many people understand that concept.

That video is of an arrow with a turbonock and an extreme single bevel head. It's been demonstrated many times (note I didn't say proven) that single bevel heads impart a spin to the arrow as it penetrates, even on arrows with no rotation in flight- straight fletch vanes, normal nocks.

BM


----------



## ismo131

Give it a reast,, please, please, pleeeease.


----------



## Matt_Potter

So what kind of archery shoes do you wear when doing a penetration test on a dead cow??


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> Some people argue in mathematical terms and I understand that. I do not think in mathematical terms. I think visually.
> When I do an experiment I need visual proof.
> For years people have posted that an arrow stops rotation as soon as it hits an animal.


No, you apply your math so you can better understand "what" you are seeing. You have a long tube of gel the arrow spins through. Why? Energy from the initial spin or drag through the medium, like air creates spin on the fletch? If you need to know, separate how much could be coming from spin energy, the rotational velocity of the mass, the rest is from drag through the medium under test.

How much KE from rotational velocity do you think you are getting? I've calculated and it ain't much if anything.


----------



## voodoofire1

Turbonockguy, so no one mentioned accuracy.... Well, when your standing in a load of crap, does it really matter where it's headed?


----------



## turbonockguy

voodoofire1 said:


> Turbonockguy, so no one mentioned accuracy.... Well, when your standing in a load of crap, does it really matter where it's headed?


Good for you. That really raises the level of the discussion. Thanks for your input. Makes me proud to be an archer! I still do not think I will treat others like you do even if i disagree with them.


----------



## turbonockguy

Matt_Potter said:


> So what kind of archery shoes do you wear when doing a penetration test on a dead cow??


That is a good one!!! I feel like I am back teaching seventh grade. Thanks for bringing those memories back. 

This is just the type of behavior our sport needs. 

Freedom of speech is part of our constitution. Using our freedoms responsibly that is up to you. I used to discuss remarks like that with my seventh graders. In hopes they would grow up and perhaps use their rights in a constructive manner. Like a good many have done on this thread.


----------



## turbonockguy

Aronnax said:


> Video is a little pointless unless you have a control to compare.
> 
> Do four tests:
> normal nock, double bevel head.
> normal nock, single bevel head.
> turbonock, double bevel head.
> turbonock, single bevel head.
> 
> And as is with everything scientific ALL ELSE MUST REMAIN EQUAL. I don't think many people understand that concept.
> 
> That video is of an arrow with a turbonock and an extreme single bevel head. It's been demonstrated many times (note I didn't say proven) that single bevel heads impart a spin to the arrow as it penetrates, even on arrows with no rotation in flight- straight fletch vanes, normal nocks.
> 
> BM


Along with being a single bevel the blades are offset just like the blades of the turbonock.
What I did the test for was to see what a pass through looked liked with this setup. First I noticed a high rotation of the arrow before it even hits the gel and this shot was at point blank. So I know that the twist in the Turonock initiated that spin. I then noticed that the Badger broadhead, which along with having a single bevel edge has the entire blade off set and it continued the rotation through the gel. Then the turbonock with the offset blades entered the gel and cut a second rotational wound path. In the same direction of rotation as the broadhead.
I do not have the funds to do four shots with that camera.
I also noticed in the Bohning video That is posted on this thread that the rotation entering the gel was considerably less than the turbonock. and also that the blazer vanes deformed as they entered the gel to the point that they reversed the rotation of the arrow. and also the blazer vanes basically collapsed. where the Turbonock Vanes did not and cut a second profound wound path.
So using what independent thought and reasoning I have I have decided at least for my own hunting setup I will use my Nocks and that Badger Broadhead. 
It seems quite logical to me that to shoot an animal two times with the same arrow would cause more traumatic damage and kill the animal faster.

I have purchased a less expensive high speed camera and when the weather warms up I will try to duplicate the Gel test in sunlight and see if I can show the difference in rotation. I can get only 1000 frames per second and a lower image quality. so I am not sure If the results will be adequate. I will give it a try.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> No, you apply your math so you can better understand "what" you are seeing. You have a long tube of gel the arrow spins through. Why? Energy from the initial spin or drag through the medium, like air creates spin on the fletch? If you need to know, separate how much could be coming from spin energy, the rotational velocity of the mass, the rest is from drag through the medium under test.
> 
> How much KE from rotational velocity do you think you are getting? I've calculated and it ain't much if anything.


I was doing the test to see what a pass through would look like. I was not trying to find out which form of spin energy did what, I wanted to see what was happening.

My Brother Sid, The engineer was involved in a govt sponsored think tank. They were trying to determine This question. At ground zero of a Nuclear bomb blast, which kills you first? the initial explosion from the detonation or the massive radiation emitted? Millions of dollars were spent on this project.
When my brother told me about this project and what he was getting paid to be involved, I was flabbergasted. I responded to him. Who Cares? He smiled.
I then asked him what the results of the think tank was, and he smiled and told me " That is classified information"


----------



## turbonockguy

Way back in the beginning of this I wrote about Bruce Lee. " you can talk about fighting, you can practice fighting, but if you want to learn to fight , you fight.

I have also made this offer on this and other threads, 
You can talk about my products you can argue about them, you can make fun of them, but I you really want to know if they are an improvement for you, you can order them and try them. If you do not like them send them back .
If you like them keep them. I would appreciate posts either way.
There have been several post from those using them on this thread. They seem to be overlooked by the negative crowd.


----------



## Matt_Potter

turbonockguy said:


> That is a good one!!! I feel like I am back teaching seventh grade. Thanks for bringing those memories back.
> 
> This is just the type of behavior our sport needs.
> 
> Freedom of speech is part of our constitution. Using our freedoms responsibly that is up to you. I used to discuss remarks like that with my seventh graders. In hopes they would grow up and perhaps use their rights in a constructive manner. Like a good many have done on this thread.


If you know a bit about your archery internet history I was referencing two of the dumbest most convoluted and circular threads ever on archery boards - go to the Fita forum and reference "archery shoes" and the leather wall and reference "dead cow" This thread is right there just a waste of space and brain power. I would have considered trying your nocks as some guys I respect use them but, you lost me on this thread. Arivn is a pure unadulterated shyster and it looks like you have gone down that road as well. If we are going to talk about 7th grade from the looks of this thread you should have paid much closer attention in 7th grade math and high school physics. 

Matt


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> I was doing the test to see what a pass through would look like. I was not trying to find out which form of spin energy did what, I wanted to see what was happening.


My point being that no matter how fast you get it spinning to begin with, the KE involved from angular velocity (RPM) is about equivalent to a bumble bee hitting your windshield. How much it rotates through your test medium is all in the momentum, medium being used, and degrees of offset. The vane/broadhead on the back of the arrow will contribute to this and to damage done, that's a given. 

As with everything archery, there's trade-off, and it will come at a cost of speed, that's been independently tested on you rear vane/broadhead: http://archeryreport.com/2009/10/fletching-review-speed-drop/ 4" feathers beat it out across the board under 30 yards on initial speed and speed retention.

Not that any Trad shooters would be involved in using that type, but it is the type you are demonstrating - not exact model, but still a hard plastic rear head.


----------



## BarneySlayer

Matt_Potter said:


> If you know a bit about your archery internet history I was referencing two of the dumbest most convoluted and circular threads ever on archery boards - go to the Fita forum and reference "archery shoes" and the leather wall and reference "dead cow" This thread is right there just a waste of space and brain power. I would have considered trying your nocks as some guys I respect use them but, you lost me on this thread. Arivn is a pure unadulterated shyster and it looks like you have gone down that road as well. If we are going to talk about 7th grade from the looks of this thread you should have paid much closer attention in 7th grade math and high school physics.
> 
> Matt


What he said.

Humor IS what we need more of in archery. Condescencion from somebody obviously oblivious to the details of what they're trying to present...

Not so much.

And as far as compound bows and rotational velocity, I've watched compound shooters, in real life, real time, regularly center punch a dot the size of a baseball at over 80 yards with plain old regular nocks and minimal offset fletching. The argument is not only not applicable in comparison to those of us shooting a helical fletch, but holds no water in the original context.

Nick, your nocks are neat, and have benefits for some people in some situations, surely. But, you overextend your claims of causation. If somebody calls you on it, they're not being negative. Please don't toss around those labels so casually. It is insulting, and beneath you.


----------



## Bill 2311

I am just put off by the overload of infomercials. 
Twenty pages now for a thread that was to introduce a new type of carbon limb, but that has rather quickly returned to a Turbonock commercial. Where did this get so far off path?
For better or worse, this OP seems to be a lightening rod when his posts go back to the subject of his products. I hate to see anyone attract that much attention as it clearly detracts from the original thread- what ever it was.


----------



## Sanford

Bill 2311 said:


> I am just put off by the overload of infomercials.
> Twenty pages now for a thread that was to introduce a new type of carbon limb, but that has rather quickly returned to a Turbonock commercial. Where did this get so far off path?
> For better or worse, this OP seems to be a lightening rod when his posts go back to the subject of his products. I hate to see anyone attract that much attention as it clearly detracts from the original thread- what ever it was.


What you kinda had to pick up on was from the beginning on some "new type" of solid carbon material. That's about like me saying I have a solid cotton shirt. IOW, this path taken was not that far off intended course.


----------



## turbonockguy

For what it is worth. I figure I have at least two to three weeks until I can go outside an do the chrono tests over again.
Yesterday I cam up with an idea. I would appreciate any input from anyone on this thought.
I think I have figured a way to verify the accuracy of my chrono with a second method of determining the arrow speed.
I have a camera that will shoot 30,60,120,240,480, and 1000 frames per second. ( I think the 1000 frames per second may actually be 980)
I am going to do high speed video most likely at 240,480, and 1000 frames per second along with the chronograph. I will try to video a measured distance on the high speed camera. and then I can count video frames with my editing equipment. and seeing how many frames it takes to travel the measured distance. I can get a very accurate speed.
Where my chronograph gives readings in feet per seconds. I can determine with the video feet per second down to a fraction of a second. 1/240th 1/480th and 1/1000th.
By doing the first two calculations I will then be able to see if the 1000fps is 1000 or 960,
If the video calculated speeds match the chronograph speeds. I would think that data should be acceptable ???
The one issue is that as the camera speed is increased the image quality deteriorates. But all I will really have to see is the frame where the nock separates from the bowstring and at the end of the measured distance the first frame with no arrow image. 
I will make these videos available and anyone with editing equipment should be able to verify what my results are.

Now. putting all seriousness aside I have decided to hire a public relations consulting group. CL & OWNS L.L.C.
This is a group of three experienced professionals who specialize in public relations. I met with them yesterday.

This is the first photo they thought might be the direction to improve my promotional endeavors.








I will post another set of photos of this group in the event anyone else wants to contact them.


----------



## turbonockguy

Here are some photos from our first meeting.






















I think I may have misspelled the groups name in the previous post. it is CLOWNS L.L.C.


----------



## ismo131

You should get tweet or intagram for this kinda selfie or #ImWithClowns #NoArchery #Nonsenss


----------



## turbonockguy

Here is a fresh chronograph test shot from Arvid Danielson of Black Swan Archery.
It is pretty simple and he explains what he did.


----------



## turbonockguy

Here is another chrono I found on you tube


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> Here is a fresh chronograph test shot from Arvid Danielson of Black Swan Archery.
> It is pretty simple and he explains what he did.


Has the guy never figured that if HIS bow fits a KE curve chart, EVERY bow fits the same KE chart, which clearly none do, including his  Hint: If he had a 250 fps or more bow in his hand, you would see that on a chrono screen instead of a KE chart  

BTW, where's the reciprocity? He never mentions or using TN's as part of the kit. 

Entertaining, but total GIGO.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> Has the guy never figured that if HIS bow fits a KE curve chart, EVERY bow fits the same KE chart, which clearly none do, including his
> 
> BTW, where's the reciprocity? He never mentions or using TN's as part of the kit.
> 
> Entertaining, but total GIGO.


He specifically used the gold tip nock because he knew I was going to post this here and wanted to show results with a conventional nock. (knowing what some folks are like on this site)


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> He specifically used the gold tip nock because he knew I was going to post this here and wanted to show results with a conventional nock. (knowing what some folks are like on this site)


The man is a total shyster! We give him what he wants, airtime, and he should thank us for that, not deter us from debunking his Ronco-type bow tests  Saddest way to have to sell archery kit, but it takes all kinds to make an industry, I guess.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> The man is a total shyster! We give him what he wants, airtime, and he should thank us for that, not deter us from debunking his Ronco-type bow tests  Saddest way to have to sell archery kit, but it takes all kinds to make an industry, I guess.


You asked the question and I gave you an honest answer. I was on the phone with him about an hour ago and he told me what I relayed to you.

Why do you include yourself with "we" ? It also takes all kinds to make up the members of Archery Talk.


----------



## turbonockguy

Here is another chrono test I found of another bow with higher poundage.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> You asked the question and I gave you an honest answer. I was on the phone with him about an hour ago and he told me what I relayed to you.


You mean you answered one question but glossed over the others? It's just too easy to show a 250 pfs bow if it's in your hand and you want to demonstrate it. A KE chart is just a KE chart.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> You mean you answered one question but glossed over the others? It's just too easy to show a 250 pfs bow if it's in your hand and you want to demonstrate it. A KE chart is just a KE chart.


I meant what I Meant. I answered what I considered I had first hand knowledge of. When I get my chrono and video speed test set up when the weather warms up. I will be able to give you a meaningful answer to you other comments.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> I meant what I Meant. I answered what I considered I had first hand knowledge of. When I get my chrono and video speed test set up when the weather warms up. I will be able to give you a meaningful answer to you other comments.


He's got working equipment. No? In all this phone calls back and forth and video sharing, surely you asked him what his chrono says about it? No?.  First hand knowledge starts at the source. It would be odd that you would be testing just to see if his readings are correct, some new-found inquisitiveness, as you already accepted his reading that show it to be a standard performance rig.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> He's got working equipment. No? In all this phone calls back and forth and video sharing, surely you asked him what his chrono says about it? No?.  First hand knowledge starts at the source. It would be odd that you would be testing just to see if his readings are correct, some new-found inquisitiveness, as you already accepted his reading that show it to be a standard performance rig.


He has done all the crono work on his bows. I believe him. My work shows the same thing. I am doing the new tests outdoors to possibly remove the doubts I see arise here. Also with the video timing I will have a secondary method of timing. I am doing this testing for people like you. Plus I like to do testing. I learn things.
Now I am waiting to see how you read into my simple words what you think I am saying. or not saying. I can not read your mind, and you certainly are missing with your attempts to read my mind.
I you look at his video it was shot outdoors in direct sunlight. He suggested I do the same . Now if the outdoor tests match the indoor tests I did with the halogen lights fine. If not Then I will have learned something. It is that simple.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> ......and you certainly are missing with your attempts to read my mind.


Bet I can  The thread fell off to page 2 and it was time to TTT. No one else would. Look, today, I'm the only one returning you the favor. Lighten up and remember my commission


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> Bet I can  The thread fell off to page 2 and it was time to TTT. No one else would. Look, today, I'm the only one returning you the favor. Lighten up and remember my commission


No! you missed again. I was thinking "Orange"


----------



## turbonockguy

I sponsor Randy. not the TV show!!!

Whatever you think about my product you can think! Randy is doing things to promote our sport to perhaps people who never look at archery. and WoW! This is beyond what I thought he could Do. I am proud to be his friend!!!! 

He tried two new impossible shots!! neither worked until he removed the feathers and bareshafted with my Turbonock T-4.
In the one video the announcer claims that the bareshaft worked because it was heavier.DUH???
Check out the nock. they do some inventive editing so it is difficult to see on the quarter shot, but the T-4 is there!!

When I was a Kid , I met and got to shoot with Howard Hill, perhaps the greatest archer of the past century! Along with being a shooter he was a positive influence on our sport! I believe Randy is right up there with Howard!! 
Howard used to shoot two arrows accurately with a long bow. Randy, using my nock has broken the Guinness World Record several times, and it now stands at 7 arrows. I know that he is working on 8!


----------



## Sanford

Thinking "orange" again today


----------



## turbonockguy

FIRST EXPERIMENT FOR CHRONO RE SHOOT.
1. I downloaded a digital stopwatch on my computer.
2. I did three videos of the stopwatch. one at 240 frames per second, one at 480 frames per second, and one at 1000 frames per second.

I did this to verify that the scan speed of the camera is correct. 
I then used my sony video editor which has a frame counter and counted how many frames each shot used in one second.
the 240 fps I got 240 and 244, the 480 fps I got 471 and 479 the 1000 fps I got 995 and 997 frames per second.
That is giving me readings much finer than the light operated chrono. and also I now have proof that the camera shoots what it advertises.
The reason I got slight variances in the frame count, I believe is that the camera was scanning faster than the images were scanning on the computer screen.
Whatever the differences are only in the hundredths to thousandths of a second. 
So when I do the outdoor shot I will be able to cross check the chrono with the camera.

All I have to do is find the frame where the nock separates from the bowstring and at 3 foot I will have a finish line. When the arrow totally passes that line and the frame is clear . I will be able to count frames and use that data to very accurately compute the arrow speed.

If any of you have a video program that allows you to count frames. you can also verify this.

I posting this because if I did not I am sure someone would ask if I could prove the camera speeds. 
so if you have a video program with a counter just pick out a second of time and count. again the first is 240 fps the second is 480 and the third is 1000.

The only problem I may have is as the speed increases the resolution of the image decreases. I am pretty sure I will get good enough video at 240,and 480. We will see what happens at 1000fps.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> Thinking "orange" again today


Actually no. I had some free time so I did some work verifying the speeds on my camera. So there would be no question as to its accuracy. I will not be posting much more on this unless I get all the grain weight arrows done . 10 8 6 5 grains per pound.
So I can not do much else until I can go outside. Today has been the warmest day in quite a while. 22 degrees.


----------



## turbonockguy

The weather is finally warming up. I hope the snow will be mostly gone in about a week.
My outdoor target is still buried.
As soon as I can I will do the chrono and video speed tests.
I received a letter from Arvid Danielson and he asked me to post it for him.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am hearing a lot from the naysayers out there. The charts I am using to illustrate 
are not intended to confuse people, but are intended to simplify a highly technical and complex mathematical subject. You can always nit pick and find some less important aspect of the formula to say the calculation is flawed. Have at it if that's what you want to do, but you are not helping other archers understand what makes it work. A fellow archer that I worked with at Hewlett-Packard in the 1970's and 1980's who held a PhD from MIT, created the graphs I use. He put together these sets of charts to simplify and help others understand to make the complex simple. 
So when you decide to pick fault with the information I am trying to make clear, you are not hurting me, but hindering your fellow archers in their quest to understand what makes it work.
Arvid Danielson
Black Swan Archery


----------



## ChadMR82

I guess I stopped caring about speed when I started to shoot traditonal. I don't understand the hype, but to each his own. Even 250 fps is not fast in reality. Wheel bows are hitting 350 fps now. A quick miss is still a miss in the deer woods. Just my .02


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> The weather is finally warming up. I hope the snow will be mostly gone in about a week.
> My outdoor target is still buried.
> As soon as I can I will do the chrono and video speed tests.
> I received a letter from Arvid Danielson and he asked me to post it for him.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> I am hearing a lot from the naysayers out there. The charts I am using to illustrate
> are not intended to confuse people, but are intended to simplify a highly technical and complex mathematical subject. You can always nit pick and find some less important aspect of the formula to say the calculation is flawed. Have at it if that's what you want to do, but you are not helping other archers understand what makes it work. A fellow archer that I worked with at Hewlett-Packard in the 1970's and 1980's who held a PhD from MIT, created the graphs I use. He put together these sets of charts to simplify and help others understand to make the complex simple.
> So when you decide to pick fault with the information I am trying to make clear, you are not hurting me, but hindering your fellow archers in their quest to understand what makes it work.
> Arvid Danielson
> Black Swan Archery


By the same simple KE graph and method he's using, my selfbows should go over 250 fps. Look, why doesn't Arvid invest in a light arrow to match the graph and shoot it? That's how you demonstrate something works. 

Funny, all that work to make a video and demonstrate that he's holding a +250fps bow, and guess what, instead of demonstrating the speed of his bow he uses an elementary graph based on his lower speed. No one is going to buy that. The "formula" is just the KE formula - calculate yourself, they match. All over the web if anyone needs it.

Facts are facts. No one is hurting fellow archers by showing facts. I still can't see why you continue to plug for this guy. He's not an upfront guy in representing his product. As harmless as it may seem, he's still perpetrating a fraud on fellow archers. No harm, i guess, unless some new person believes it and invests real money into his made up speed test.


----------



## BarneySlayer

ttt for you 

That guy is so full of it. my mom worked for IBM supporting computer systems. My dad helped steve jobs and crew get apple off the ground, way back when the apple 2 plus was the new thing, and computers didn't have hard drives. I wrote my college application essays on an Apple III. I worked with Microsoft employees doing bench tests to evaluate equipment performance.

More importantly, I'm not an idiot. This guy is flat out dishonest implying that his bows will do something he refuses to prove, but rather shows it doing something else, holds up a chart implying that it means something it doesn't, and then characterizes calling him on this tupidity as nit picking.

Well, that's what you do with nits, pick them off.


----------



## Easykeeper

A complicated and mathematical subject? I'm pretty sure most people can grasp a chart of the kinetic energy formula without help from someone with a PhD.

An old favorite song of mine...


----------



## turbonockguy

Easykeeper said:


> A complicated and mathematical subject? I'm pretty sure most people can grasp a chart of the kinetic energy formula without help from someone with a PhD.
> 
> An old favorite song of mine...


The chart is easy to grasp just as he stated.


----------



## Matt_Potter

Your in some great company in your role as a shill for Arvin.


----------



## turbonockguy

Matt_Potter said:


> Your in some great company in your role as a shill for Arvin.


Thank you!
I have openly stated my friendship with Arvid. (not Arvin) We became acquainted several years ago when some of his shooters started using my nocks with some successes. I was getting back into trad shooting. and got one of his bows. I really liked it. I am not a great shot but this bow is really nice to shoot. Sometime ago I asked Arvid If I could be an "honorary" staff shooter and it was OK With him.
Now If this fits into your understanding of shill, you should then consider that all who post on this site as staff shooters, for any products, Mathews, Hoyt, Bohning,Pse, are all shills.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------n accomplice of a hawker, gambler, or swindler who acts as an enthusiastic customer to entice or encourage others.
A shill, also called a plant or a stooge, is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that they have a close relationship with the ...
One who poses as a satisfied customer or an enthusiastic gambler to dupe bystanders into participating in a swindle. v. shilled, shill·ing, shills. v.intr. To act as a ...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So have you had a bad experience with Arvid you would like to share?


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Whoops!
Dan


----------



## David Alford

Wow, what a thread! The interested may wish to read my interview with Arvid Danielson in the current issue of Traditional Bowhunter Magazine.


----------



## JParanee

David Alford said:


> Wow, what a thread! The interested may wish to read my interview with Arvid Danielson in the current issue of Traditional Bowhunter Magazine.


No thanks


----------



## turbonockguy

JParanee said:


> No thanks


Thanks for posting this info David. I do apologize for the above response by another member of this site.
Thankfully there are only a small number people like this. Perhaps those with open minds will check out the article. I will.


----------



## David Alford

I'd bet not one person here would dare to act this way if we were all siting around the proverbial campfire. There is nothing in Arvid Danielson's persona that lends itself to such rude comments. I doubt a single person here would have been able to do even a fraction of his accomplishments in archery. I've met a lot of arses in my life and Danielson, IMHO, is a class act. His shortcoming, if it is one, is that he does not suffer fools. 

I don't want to be a shill for him at all, I'm just telling you guys the straight dope, that if you met him you probably would be impressed and happy you met him. I don't meet many people that I can say that about. Yes, but all means there is arguably a duty to correct errors, but there is no need to demonize a person that you've never met.


----------



## David Alford

As to why this thread got diverted in turbo nocks, it's largely because you guys kept criticizing/challenging turbo nocks. Nick is passionate about his invention and of course he will be inclined to keep defending it.


----------



## David Alford

Nick, I think turbonocks are great. Thanks for your invention, I know a lot of hard work went into bringing it to market. Folks, look around the room you're in. Think of all the work that went into creating and manufacturing all the things around you. How we take the effort of others for granted...and most of us will not create a single thing in our entire lives that help others. Think about this before you criticize others who run small businesses that create and bring to market things that are proArchery, our common love.


----------



## grantmac

I see shill #1 has arrived, shocked it took this long.


----------



## David Alford

grantmac, I shoot turbo nocks and I have a Black Swan bow. I like 'em. I'm one of the few people here who actually has met Arvid, shot with him, and discussed archery with him not once, but on many occasions. You and others here are demonizing a very knowledgeable and nice man. You and others here have no idea what you are doing in these personal attacks. 

Let me add I have no problem with the correction of technical and data errors.


----------



## JParanee

I have nothing against Black Swan Bows and have seen and shot them on many occasions 

I have also nothing against turbo nocks and have seen and shot them on many occasions 

My comment was in jest after this abortion of a thread 

Did you not see the smiley face ?

As for talking around the proverbial campfire 

My name is my sig and I'm at Denton hill ,Baltimore , Whitingham and a few other shoots and I'm easy to find and I would of made the same comment in front of anyone when relating to this thread 

Btw 

Go over to Trad Talk where your buddy Arvid ripped off one of the nicest guys in archery Rusty C 

That is my only grief with Black Swan Bows


----------



## JParanee

turbonockguy said:


> Thanks for posting this info David. I do apologize for the above response by another member of this site.
> Thankfully there are only a small number people like this. Perhaps those with open minds will check out the article. I will.


Hey Turbo 

I have never had a bad thing to say about your nocks and please do not apologize for me


----------



## Attack

This abortion of a thread was totally fine and quite informative for a while. No one turned the thread into a "Turbonock" debate except turbonock guy. As for Blackswan, I have not had the pleasure of shooting one yet as there are none around. If I get the chance I will. The problem is the physically impossible claims. Here is a test for you... Dry fire the bow and chrono the string. If you can get an arrow as light as air, this will be your speed.


----------



## David Alford

JParanee, I doubt the whole story has been told. I'm inclined to believe many honorable bowyers have customers who claim they have been ripped off due to some disagreement. The bowyers who actually do rip people off are rarely old timers with a history of archery accomplishments. I don't think it is prudent for you or anyone else to be passing judgement on the basis of hearsay - and worse, to be spreading rumors.


----------



## David Alford

Attack said:


> No one turned the thread into a "Turbonock" debate except turbonock guy. )


He was attacked and naturally he defended something he has invested a portion of his life in. I think it's a pretty normal reaction.


----------



## Attack

He was attacked on the outlandish claims about the BS speeds and then started talking about his nocks. That is what brought on the debate on the nocks. No one just jumped in and said "turbonocks are crap" which I am sure they are not.


----------



## JParanee

David Alford said:


> JParanee, I doubt the whole story has been told. I'm inclined to believe many honorable bowyers have customers who claim they have been ripped off due to some disagreement. The bowyers who actually do rip people off are rarely old timers with a history of archery accomplishments. I don't think it is prudent for you or anyone else to be passing judgement on the basis of hearsay - and worse, to be spreading rumors.


David not spreading rumors 

Go on Trad Talk 

You or Arvid 

Post a thread to Rusty Craine 

He is very well respected and a customer of many many bowyers 

Rusty will tell you what happened 

Sure there are many disgruntled customers of many bowyers 

This is from Rusty who has always been proven to be a gentleman and a nice man also 

If you were looking to draw attention to your article you certainly picked a poor thread to align with 

I have not commented on this thread that much since its inception and in retrospect I should not of made the comment that has prompted are conversation ......

Do tell Arvid that he did not do himself any favors by not at least telling Turbo that his initial numbers were off and he should not have posted 

sure people make mistakes but if I call up Porsche and tell them I just broke 300 mph with a car they know can only go 180 they are going to say hey don't post that......we will both look stupid 

In Turbos enthusiasm he has not done his prouduct or Arvid's any favors IMHO 

By all means I hope the article does well but alas I have let my electronic subscription expire 

But we have successfully jump started Turbos thread again which you both wanted

So you can both thank me later


----------



## David Alford

I read Rusty was thanking Arvid for fixing things. It was simply a configuration issue, correct? 

It doesn't matter to me whether your opinion about Turbos enthusiasm helped or hurt, it was clearly an honest error. That is the main thing. Why should anyone hold that against him or Arvid? Chronos are notoriously sensitive to light and stuff, this type of error has happened countless times before and will happen countless times again. Good grief why make a conspiracy out everything or even think that Arvid or Nick were licking their chops at getting rich. It's just silly. I've been accused of trying to jump start my own sales of my instructional method, totally false. Here is the real reason: people defend themselves at extreme length when they've told the truth and other people are calling them a liar. It's a very strong human tendency. A corollary of this is that if someone does behave in this fashion, it often is because they in fact have told the truth. Police investigators know that liars will try to change the subject away from themselves as soon as possible after just a few rebuttals. And henceforth, they tend to avoid the subject.

And why would I want the thread jump started back to turbo nocks? There is no friggin' conspiracy here. He was attacked and he's a passionate guy who believes/knows his product has valid qualities and of course he defended himself per behavior of a truthful person just described.


----------



## Imissedagain

Maybe I'm not reading with both oars in the water but if someone purchased one of those bows and it does not make the claimed FPS will they receive a complete refund?


----------



## MrSinister

any publicity is good publicity I take it. At least to those who don't know better. What a joke.


----------



## grander

The world is full of this type crap. The more you see it, the more you recognize it as crap. All based on thinking buyers are stupid. Bunch a gimmick pimps.


----------



## SteveB

Rusty is stll waiting resolution as of a week ago.


----------



## turbonockguy

For what it is worth. A while back I stated I would re shoot the chronograph shots outdoors. with both a chronograph and a High speed camera.
Well since then winter has not left. We have had only 2 days above freezing. The forecast is for another week of frigid temperatures.
My yard is still under a foot of ice and snow.
As soon as the temperatures get into the high 40s or 50s I will do the tests. Frigid weather can damage my high speed camera and also me!
The Photos were shot in the past two days from my home.


----------



## BarneySlayer

Funny. You offered to let anybody who wanted to chronograph that bow. I and others offered To take you up on that. The offer disappeared behind the weather. With a few exceptions, I've had fine weather since then. Could have gone back and forthh many times between then and now.

I'm guessing I'll never see it. That's fine.

Maybe we should just start a new black swan advertising thread. That way you'll get more search engine exposure. 

How about"Black Swan Poll, not necessarily fraudulent, Kinda Sorta?"


----------



## Arron

The thread that just stays on life support :spam1:


----------



## ranchoarcher

The original question was never answered. Provide something that demonstrates the advertised speeds with appropriate arrows. Shooting a 10gpp arrow and then claiming a 5 or 6 gpp arrow would yield 300+ fps isn't going to fly. It's been said to let it be documented by a third party. I'll volunteer. I've got a hooter shooter, chrono, scale, and lots of arrows I can use to get the correct weight for the bow. Offer is on the table.


----------



## BarneySlayer

ranchoarcher said:


> The original question was never answered. Provide something that demonstrates the advertised speeds with appropriate arrows. Shooting a 10gpp arrow and then claiming a 5 or 6 gpp arrow would yield 300+ fps isn't going to fly. It's been said to let it be documented by a third party. I'll volunteer. I've got a hooter shooter, chrono, scale, and lots of arrows I can use to get the correct weight for the bow. Offer is on the table.


The weather will never be that good.



But I'm no weather man.


----------



## JParanee

ranchoarcher said:


> The original question was never answered. Provide something that demonstrates the advertised speeds with appropriate arrows. Shooting a 10gpp arrow and then claiming a 5 or 6 gpp arrow would yield 300+ fps isn't going to fly. It's been said to let it be documented by a third party. I'll volunteer. I've got a hooter shooter, chrono, scale, and lots of arrows I can use to get the correct weight for the bow. Offer is on the table.


You got a great garage


----------



## ranchoarcher

JParanee said:


> You got a great garage


Correction...MAN CAVE


----------



## David Alford

I may be wrong but I think Arvid DID use a Hooter Shooter and 3rd party testing in Tucson, AZ. But let's say I'm wrong and the claim is based on extrapolated results from the graph. In this case there is still no reason to demonize the guy. Jack Howard, Harold Groves, and other notable bowyers have claimed their bows were the world's fastest. They probably felt they were telling the truth and did have advances that provided some justification for their claims.


----------



## ranchoarcher

The graph given is meaningless. You can not shoot one arrow and then apply it to a graph of unknown origin and say what was said. Bows don't work that way. The limbs from bow to bow and maker to maker all have different characteristics that define their rates of acceleration with different weight arrows. If the tests do exist that demonstrate near warp speed with light arrows, let's get em posted and put this to rest. If they got a bow that can throw a 6gpp arrow faster than my 40lb tiburon or titan without exploding I might be interested. 215 fps is the magic number.


----------



## GEREP

Sanford said:


> He's got working equipment. No? In all this phone calls back and forth and video sharing, surely you asked him what his chrono says about it? No?.  First hand knowledge starts at the source.


I haven't checked in on this thread for over a month, I'm actually surprised it's still going on. I thought I'd check back in to see if there were any new "revelations" and I come away this time with the same question I had before. 

While I agree with what most are saying about accurate uniform testing (and the claims in question on this thread), I just can't figure out why so many people expect one level of testing from one source and seem to give others a total pass on the same.

There are bowyers out there that claim they have some of the most sophisticated testing equipment, procedures, and knowledge in the business, yet refuse to ever post simple performance numbers for their own products. Instead, they rely on the dissemination of happy customer opinions, rumor, and the finding of garage testers with unknown testing parameters, equipment, and motive.

If you're OK with that type of testing, that's fine, but let's not hold one bowyer to a standard that we aren't willing to hold every bowyer to.

KPC


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> Funny. You offered to let anybody who wanted to chronograph that bow. I and others offered To take you up on that. The offer disappeared behind the weather. With a few exceptions, I've had fine weather since then. Could have gone back and forthh many times between then and now.
> 
> I'm guessing I'll never see it. That's fine.
> 
> Maybe we should just start a new black swan advertising thread. That way you'll get more search engine exposure.
> 
> How about"Black Swan Poll, not necessarily fraudulent, Kinda Sorta?"


I think I stated this before. I want to do the outside testing first! Before I send my bow to anyone. By using the high speed camera and the chrono I should be able to verify the speeds. Then I will see about having someone else (unbiased) test shoot. I do apologize for the weather Its my fault it is still cold. Yep somehow I mysteriously have controlled the weather to avoid doing the testing. As I stated to you in an earlier communication I had contacted one of the people you had suggested. you seem to have forgotten that.

I have the 2 cell chrono. I have the casio 1000 frames per second camera, I have a 5.6,8,&10 grain arrows ready to go.
When I am done shooting in sunlight with this and the numbers are not satisfactory I will see who gets to do the testing.


----------



## Sanford

GEREP said:


> I haven't checked in on this thread for over a month, I'm actually surprised it's still going on. I thought I'd check back in to see if there were any new "revelations" and I come away this time with the same question I had before.
> 
> While I agree with what most are saying about accurate uniform testing (and the claims in question on this thread), I just can't figure out why so many people expect one level of testing from one source and seem to give others a total pass on the same.
> 
> There are bowyers out there that claim they have some of the most sophisticated testing equipment, procedures, and knowledge in the business, yet refuse to ever post simple performance numbers for their own products. Instead, they rely on the dissemination of happy customer opinions, rumor, and the finding of garage testers with unknown testing parameters, equipment, and motive.
> 
> If you're OK with that type of testing, that's fine, but let's not hold one bowyer to a standard that we aren't willing to hold every bowyer to.
> 
> KPC


Some bowyers' reputations, integrity, and knowledge are as good as anything that can be lab proven. Some marketing claims really ain't even worth taking to a verifiable test, which kinda negates the first three requirements for starters.


----------



## GEREP

Sanford said:


> Some bowyers' reputations, integrity, and knowledge are as good as anything that can be lab proven. Some marketing claims really ain't even worth taking to a verifiable test, which kinda negates the first three requirements for starters.


I don't disagree. However, one would think with that amount of knowledge, integrity, and reputation, they would have it no other way than to provide such testing results. In my opinion, failing to do so calls it all into question. 

KPC


----------



## BarneySlayer

turbonockguy said:


> I think I stated this before. I want to do the outside testing first! Before I send my bow to anyone. By using the high speed camera and the chrono I should be able to verify the speeds. Then I will see about having someone else (unbiased) test shoot. I do apologize for the weather Its my fault it is still cold. Yep somehow I mysteriously have controlled the weather to avoid doing the testing. As I stated to you in an earlier communication I had contacted one of the people you had suggested. you seem to have forgotten that.
> 
> I have the 2 cell chrono. I have the casio 1000 frames per second camera, I have a 5.6,8,&10 grain arrows ready to go.
> When I am done shooting in sunlight with this and the numbers are not satisfactory I will see who gets to do the testing.


First, you offered to let somebody else verify. When people offered to take you up on it, you said you wanted to test it outside first...

It's your bow. If you don't want to let strangers handle it, that's fine. Just say so. If that's not the case, the real question then, is WHY? Letting somebody else test it while you're wintered in doesn't prohibit you from testing it after the weather gets better.

Drawing those lines, as you've done, sure looks a whole lot like, "Look over there!" (exits stage left)


----------



## David Alford

I gave the YouTube video where Arvid himself chrono test his bow in a relevant test for hunting vs. maximizing the chrono test. Shall we not give him some credit for this? Instead of 30" he draws to 28". Instead of a shooting machine/mechanical release, he uses a hunting glove. Instead of a low brace height to maximize, he uses the middle range of recommended brace height. Instead of using a light arrow, he uses a hunting weight arrow 10 grs/lb.

My challenge to all the critics here of Arvid/BlackSwan is simply this: show me similar videos other owners of other trad. bow companies doing the same. Name some. Name two or three. Heck, name just one. 

Here's the video link again of Arvid doing the chrono test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS7m7jSHrR0


----------



## David Alford

BarneySlayer said:


> First, you offered to let somebody else verify. When people offered to take you up on it, you said you wanted to test it outside first...
> 
> It's your bow. If you don't want to let strangers handle it, that's fine. Just say so. If that's not the case, the real question then, is WHY? Letting somebody else test it while you're wintered in doesn't prohibit you from testing it after the weather gets better.
> 
> Drawing those lines, as you've done, sure looks a whole lot like, "Look over there!" (exits stage left)


Calm down man! He wanted to finish his own tests and appears to be quite willing to let other testers have at it. The fact that you are jumping on him when it is obvious he wants other people to test the bow is just another cheap shot, IMO. Where do you guys come from to behave like this?


----------



## David Alford

JParnee you are one sick dude for try to incite anger and angst over a bow limb fitting snafu that isn't even your order. And you are spreading this across the internet in multiple forums w/o even Arvid's side of the situation? Let me break the news to you, right now today there are other bowyers dealing with split glass, misaligned limbs, twisted tips, riser imperfections, etc. et. These are hand build bows, such things happen frequently.


----------



## Blacky

I was approached by several guys on my take about that thread and the speeds posted. Let me just say this: I will not touch that subject with a long pole. 

'nuff said


----------



## kegan

David Alford said:


> JParnee you are one sick dude for try to incite anger and angst over a bow limb fitting snafu that isn't even your order. And you are spreading this across the internet in multiple forums w/o even Arvid's side of the situation? Let me break the news to you, right now today there are other bowyers dealing with split glass, misaligned limbs, twisted tips, riser imperfections, etc. et. These are hand build bows, such things happen frequently.


He isn't trying to incite anything. There are two sides to every debate, he's offering a valid one. You're just trying to discredit rather than accept.

How about everyone stops feeding the trolls?


----------



## Sanford

David Alford said:


> JParnee you are one sick dude for try to incite anger and angst over a bow limb fitting snafu that isn't even your order. And you are spreading this across the internet in multiple forums w/o even Arvid's side of the situation? Let me break the news to you, right now today there are other bowyers dealing with split glass, misaligned limbs, twisted tips, riser imperfections, etc. et. These are hand build bows, such things happen frequently.


I remember that situation very well. Black Swan was offering ILF limbs for the first time. Arvid apparently knew nothing about the concept, as his design was not only completely non-functional as ILF, it wouldn't fit some other risers for a simple hook up if one even wanted to forgo the ILF adjust-ability one paid good money for. Actually, the way the limb rode the pocket was total nonsense.

When one of the first takers ordered a pair and he immediately recognized the problems, he sent them back. Arvid just ground them down a little to make fit, never addressing that the limbs were totally useless as ILF limbs. As far as known, Arvid never made a true ILF limb and still doesn't, so there's nothing to trade him back for.

Was not a case of selling something that failed. Was a case of selling something that never existed.

That is not rumor.


----------



## ranchoarcher

David Alford said:


> I gave the YouTube video where Arvid himself chrono test his bow in a relevant test for hunting vs. maximizing the chrono test. Shall we not give him some credit for this? Instead of 30" he draws to 28". Instead of a shooting machine/mechanical release, he uses a hunting glove. Instead of a low brace height to maximize, he uses the middle range of recommended brace height. Instead of using a light arrow, he uses a hunting weight arrow 10 grs/lb.
> 
> My challenge to all the critics here of Arvid/BlackSwan is simply this: show me similar videos other owners of other trad. bow companies doing the same. Name some. Name two or three. Heck, name just one.
> 
> Here's the video link again of Arvid doing the chrono test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS7m7jSHrR0


 One arrow shot does not produce a legitimate graph demonstrating arrow speeds of other arrows NOT shot on other draw weights NOT shot. For that matter, different weight arrow speeds on the same draw weight can't be extrapolated with any level of accuracy doing what was done. I've done enough testing myself to know that I'd look like a complete buffoon posting something like that. Bows are funny like that. Physics comes in and totally trashes wishful thinking.


----------



## JParanee

Alright David since you asked 

Btw this is the only place I have mentioned it 

I know a bit about marketing 

You just wrote an article for traditional Bowhunter 

A good magazine that regretfully is not very popular these days 

Do to the Internet all magazines have taken a hit 

They need Blackys bow reports back if you ask me 

If you type in the words Black Swan on most archery forums you get many hits 

Usually long drawn out threads with lots of back and forth arguing. These threads attract lots of attention 

Jerry Springer effect 

So let's look at this 

You chose to write an article about Black Swan Bows 

Maybe you picked a controversial Bow Company hoping it would attract interest in your article 

I can see your pitch to the magazine ......... Just look at all the thread hits this bow co has 

With articles on less controversial bow companies Not being a draw 

To bad it's at times bad press......... Not so much about the quality of the bows but the outlandish claims and service 

But heck any press is good press  

Than you went and pulled up any recent thread on Black Swan so you could advertise your article 

That's fine 

Just because you opened up a thread that probably should of been left to die it's not my fault more not to positive things have come to light 

If you would of started out fresh with a new thread about your article maybe it would of been received better 

So you call me a sick guy 

I would love to have a chat with you around that imaginary campfire you speak of 

I have nothing bad to say about Black Swan Bows other than they seem to attract a lot of goofs 

Btw all bow companies have problems with limbs 

It's all how it's dealt with 

I like the Black Swans I've shot 

They are a nice performance oriented bow 

They just need better spokesman 

Are you not the innovator of the Famous STAR Method 

Please tell us how that works 

I am not going to keep this going even though I know you would like me too  

I will make a deal with you 

Get my friend Rusty a set of replacement limbs or better yet a refund and I will publicly post that I am sorry for bringing this up and what a stand up company BS is 

Ball is in your corner mouth 

Step up


----------



## JParanee

Here you go page 2 

http://tradtalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51710&highlight=Black+swan&page=2


----------



## Jim Casto Jr

JParanee,

Your link only goes to the last thread on TT about Rusty's ordeal. Here's the link to the thread when he first got the limbs--with pictures.

It's obvious Rusty didn't get what he paid for. It's obvious this bowyer has no idea what an ILF limb is nor how it functions. For him to claim he INVENTED the system is... well... silly. You will see invention at work in the pictures in the thread below. It's also obvious this bowyer still owes Rusty. 

http://tradtalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22354


----------



## JINKSTER

I have three words after reading the links provided by J. Paranee and Mr. Casto....

OH...DEAR....LORD!!! :mg:


----------



## Attack

David Alford said:


> I gave the YouTube video where Arvid himself chrono test his bow in a relevant test for hunting vs. maximizing the chrono test. Shall we not give him some credit for this? Instead of 30" he draws to 28". Instead of a shooting machine/mechanical release, he uses a hunting glove. Instead of a low brace height to maximize, he uses the middle range of recommended brace height. Instead of using a light arrow, he uses a hunting weight arrow 10 grs/lb.
> 
> My challenge to all the critics here of Arvid/BlackSwan is simply this: show me similar videos other owners of other trad. bow companies doing the same. Name some. Name two or three. Heck, name just one.
> 
> Here's the video link again of Arvid doing the chrono test: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS7m7jSHrR0


Lol... I like his drawcheck flag... That he draws right passed by 2" lol anyone else notice that?


----------



## JParanee

Jim Casto Jr said:


> JParanee,
> 
> Your link only goes to the last thread on TT about Rusty's ordeal. Here's the link to the thread when he first got the limbs--with pictures.
> 
> It's obvious Rusty didn't get what he paid for. It's obvious this bowyer has no idea what an ILF limb is nor how it functions. For him to claim he INVENTED the system is... well... silly. You will see invention at work in the pictures in the thread below. It's also obvious this bowyer still owes Rusty.
> 
> http://tradtalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22354


Jim 

Thank you 

I feel bad I even made the initial comment 

When I wrote 

No Thanks  

I was jesting that after this thread I couldn't stand to here anything else about Black Swan 

I was kidding 

But after Turbo wanted to call me Rude and Mr Alford wanted to make comments ......well I'll show them rude 

I like Arvid's bows in general and I have nothing bad to say personally about his work 

I hear he is a very nice man to talk to........ but so is Rusty Craine 

This is a small community 

Eventually a lot if us meet 

A lot of us stick up for and look after each other 

I'm very sorry to Arvid 

He makes a nice bow 

He should find people with less drama to represent his work and pick up his customer service a bit


----------



## Str8 Shooter

Did anyone else notice in the video with the extrapolated speeds that the energy remains constant (or very near constant)? If you figure out the KE of the shot Arvin took using the arrow at 10 gpp and than run the numbers from the speeds he says it will shoot the KE is virtually identical...even a touch higher at lighter weights. That shows the graph is purely theoretical because anyone who has chronographed arrows at various weights from one bow knows that the lighter arrows always have less KE and lower efficiency.

There isn't a material on the planet that bypasses that. That's basic physics.

The issue is all this detracts from any positive there is about the bows and leaves a sour taste in the mouths of prospective customers.


----------



## JINKSTER

Str8 Shooter said:


> The issue is all this detracts from any positive there is about the bows and leaves a sour taste in the mouths of prospective customers.


Agreed...and the way I now see it?...

BS made a decent and somewhat unique bow that exhibited above average performance...but then followed with outlandish claims based on backyard level testing...and the killer?....then marketed products to well known and upstanding archers that were well beyond their applied design abilities and apparently have refused to make good on such.

In my eye's?...it really is a crying shame...I mean here you know someone poured their heart and soul into creating what seems to be somewhat of an above average bow and then?....well?...here we are...and this is what happens when "Over-The-Top Marketing" is coupled with "Arrogant Customer Service"...and it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to know that not squaring up with Rusty would be the death nail in your bow biz...like I said...a crying shame.


----------



## David Alford

I believe the result would be the same with a second arrow and a third arrow. Even if Arvid were to do that, someone could chirp in that's an insufficient statistical sample. So what you really want is a complete statistical test as you say with more bow weights and more arrow weights and of course in statistical numbers. Never mind that you can't give an example of other bowyers doing the same. 

Even if Arvid did all this, you would question his chronograph, true? So basically, he is not going to be able to satisfy you and other critics, there would always be something to complain about and you know that. The solution of course is independent testing by a noted bow bow tester who is known to be honest and objective.

Well, guess what, that has been done. Norm Mullaney's evaluation summary is here even though it was with Arvid's older and slower limbs:
http://www.blackswanarchery.com/#/report. 

The result was that at the time of testing, Black Swan's bows had the highest efficiency of any recurve ever tested by him.Show me one other bowyer who had a similar objective report by a noted independent bow tester.


----------



## David Alford

Jinkster, the way I see it is Arvid's recurve is way above decent and per Mullaney's test as well as others. Secondly, I don't think there Nick's chromo test in any way was "over the top marketing". Rather, it was an honest mistake and in his many posts here it is obvious to me the man is honest and truly trying to do a better and more accurate chrono test, followed by sending the bow to a 3rd party for more independent testing.

As far as "arrogant customer service" I really don't know. As others have acknowledged above, there are two sides to every debate. We haven't heard the other side. All I can say is that I have found Arvid to be just the opposite the way he is being portrayed by his critics here. But you know what, I've heard of poor customer service by many vendors and I don't go around spreading someone else's experience to multiple forums regarding products or services I have not contracted with said vendors and have no personal experience with. Call me old fashioned if you want, it doesn't sit right with me. I've seen this time and time again in people who like to gossip about others. I think it is a poor personal trait.


----------



## David Alford

GEREP said:


> I haven't checked in on this thread for over a month, I'm actually surprised it's still going on. I thought I'd check back in to see if there were any new "revelations" and I come away this time with the same question I had before.
> 
> While I agree with what most are saying about accurate uniform testing (and the claims in question on this thread), I just can't figure out why so many people expect one level of testing from one source and seem to give others a total pass on the same.
> 
> There are bowyers out there that claim they have some of the most sophisticated testing equipment, procedures, and knowledge in the business, yet refuse to ever post simple performance numbers for their own products. Instead, they rely on the dissemination of happy customer opinions, rumor, and the finding of garage testers with unknown testing parameters, equipment, and motive.
> 
> If you're OK with that type of testing, that's fine, but let's not hold one bowyer to a standard that we aren't willing to hold every bowyer to.
> 
> KPC


Exactly right. At least Arvid had Mullaney do an independent objective test. Where are the Mullaney or other independent tests for other bowyers? Please note Mullany's chrono test with different arrow weights, Arvid's recurve was the most efficient he ever tested and those limbs were a lot slower than the new ones Arvid builds.

Then Arvid shoots an arrow to get a chrono reading in his backyard with a short draw, a hunting wt. arrow and using a hunting glove and critics jump all over him because the want more and more. My response would have been, "Arvid, thanks very much. Would you mind shooting more arrows and at different draw weights? Thanks in advance..."


----------



## David Alford

JParanee said:


> Alright David since you asked
> 
> Btw this is the only place I have mentioned it
> 
> I know a bit about marketing
> 
> You just wrote an article for traditional Bowhunter
> 
> A good magazine that regretfully is not very popular these days
> 
> Do to the Internet all magazines have taken a hit
> 
> They need Blackys bow reports back if you ask me
> 
> If you type in the words Black Swan on most archery forums you get many hits
> 
> Usually long drawn out threads with lots of back and forth arguing. These threads attract lots of attention
> 
> Jerry Springer effect
> 
> So let's look at this
> 
> You chose to write an article about Black Swan Bows
> 
> Maybe you picked a controversial Bow Company hoping it would attract interest in your article
> 
> I can see your pitch to the magazine ......... Just look at all the thread hits this bow co has
> 
> With articles on less controversial bow companies Not being a draw
> 
> To bad it's at times bad press......... Not so much about the quality of the bows but the outlandish claims and service
> 
> But heck any press is good press
> 
> Than you went and pulled up any recent thread on Black Swan so you could advertise your article
> 
> That's fine
> 
> Just because you opened up a thread that probably should of been left to die it's not my fault more not to positive things have come to light
> 
> If you would of started out fresh with a new thread about your article maybe it would of been received better
> 
> So you call me a sick guy
> 
> I would love to have a chat with you around that imaginary campfire you speak of
> 
> I have nothing bad to say about Black Swan Bows other than they seem to attract a lot of goofs
> 
> Btw all bow companies have problems with limbs
> 
> It's all how it's dealt with
> 
> I like the Black Swans I've shot
> 
> They are a nice performance oriented bow
> 
> They just need better spokesman
> 
> Are you not the innovator of the Famous STAR Method
> 
> Please tell us how that works
> 
> I am not going to keep this going even though I know you would like me too
> 
> I will make a deal with you
> 
> Get my friend Rusty a set of replacement limbs or better yet a refund and I will publicly post that I am sorry for bringing this up and what a stand up company BS is
> 
> Ball is in your corner mouth
> 
> Step up


Jparanee, you know something about marketing? How do you think mentioning my article about the obviously relevant topic of Black Swan Archery makes me a penny? More people read the article? So what, how does that help me? You think I make a percentage? I mentioned the article because it was relevant. Good grief, the conspiracy theories are are too funny.

Rusty needs to be on the phone with Arvid, not posting his side about it in forums. That would tend to tick off any bowyer. I hope he get's it resolved. At this point maybe Arvid is ticked off back at him for spreading his side of the story because we don't know Arvid's side. I have zero anger at Rusty. Rather, I just think it is in bad form for others to be posting their side of the controversy to multiple forums when it isn't even their order.


----------



## David Alford

"I will make a deal with you Get my friend Rusty a set of replacement limbs or better yet a refund and I will publicly post that I am sorry for bringing this up and what a stand up company BS is Ball is in your corner mouth Step up"

JParnee, let me be crystal clear about this. I have no business connection to Black Swan. I shoot a BS 52" recurve for hunting as well as other bows such as Bob Lee, Rivers Edge, Morrison, etc. They are all top end bows, in my opinion.


----------



## grantmac

I think the product and it's shills speak for themselves, even when the world really wants to stop hearing.

One sells an idea which he hasn't proved exists, despite years of telling the world it was just around the corner.
The other sells engineering which he admits to not having the engineering knowledge (or apparently basic math skills) to evaluate.

-Grant


----------



## Attack

David Alford said:


> Jparanee, you know something about marketing? How do you think mentioning my article about the obviously relevant topic of Black Swan Archery makes me a penny? More people read the article? So what, how does that help me? You think I make a percentage? I mentioned the article because it was relevant. Good grief, the conspiracy theories are are too funny.
> 
> Rusty needs to be on the phone with Arvid, not posting his side about it in forums. That would tend to tick off any bowyer. I hope he get's it resolved. At this point maybe Arvid is ticked off back at him for spreading his side of the story because we don't know Arvid's side. I have zero anger at Rusty. Rather, I just think it is in bad form for others to be posting their side of the controversy to multiple forums when it isn't even their order.


Umm... Ya... The more people that read your article, the more hits you get, the more articles you get to write, the more money you make... Correct? Me thinks you DO know a thing or two about marketing... Don't think I am going to be looking at your rag and you can tell your editor it is because of you 

When you try to call out people like JP and Rusty, you should be prepared for some folks to stick up for them. Rusty actually brought to light that the limbs he purchased and that BS were advertising as ILF were not ILF at all and just something BS came up with thinking it would work but didn't at all. He probably saved more than a few people their hard earned $ and possibly even BS from a lawsuit or two. This happened 5 years ago. It has never been resolved.


----------



## ranchoarcher

BS isn't the only outfit out there with a Mullany report covering carbon filament limbs and near 90% efficiency. http://www.acsbows.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/nfm_report.pdf These guys did it back in 04 and from what's written, have a patent on the technology. Is ACS or A&H making the limbs for BS? Seems like the same exact thing.


----------



## David Alford

Grant, why launch into a personal attack on me in the unrelated matter of a shooting method? The topic is Black Swan bows. I feel like I'm dealing with a bunch of bullies here who want to swing and hurt people.


----------



## David Alford

Attack said:


> Umm... Ya... The more people that read your article, the more hits you get, the more articles you get to write, the more money you make... Correct? Me thinks you DO know a thing or two about marketing... Don't think I am going to be looking at your rag and you can tell your editor it is because of you
> 
> Attack (appropriate handle), you are NOT correct. What hits? IT'S NOT MY "RAG". I'M NOT EVEN A SUBSCRIBER. YOU COULDN'T BE MORE WRONG IN YOUR CRAZY ASSERTIONS.
> 
> Good grief, are you all high schoolers?


----------



## David Alford

ranchoarcher said:


> BS isn't the only outfit out there with a Mullany report covering carbon filament limbs and near 90% efficiency. http://www.acsbows.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/nfm_report.pdf These guys did it back in 04 and from what's written, have a patent on the technology. Is ACS or A&H making the limbs for BS? Seems like the same exact thing.


You are correct and as soon as I hit "send" I remembered about their Mullaney test report. Mullaney has done others as well, but these are uncommon and I still don't know of other bow company owners who grab a bow off the shelf and test it for all to see at what are suboptimal conditions (glove, short draw, 10 gr/inch arrow, relatively low poundage).

FYI, that patent might not exist if it wasn't for me. OL Adcock told me he had given up on it during a hunting trip we made together. We had a long multi hour conversation about it and I told him not to give up on it and fire his present patent attorneys who initially told him he wouldn't be able to get a patent.

Re: "is ACS or AS&H making the limbs for BS? No they are not. The limb technology is entirely different. However, I would say ACS and Black Swan along with Border Bows are arguably the three fastest bows out there. However, my RER recurve and Bob Lee are also very fast and I like all these bows. Morrison's are fast as well and I have one also. Lot's of fast bows today, it's not the only criteria I like in a bow. 

I wouldn't have said a thing about BS but I think to attack a bowyer you have never met, had a transaction with, or even spoke to, is poor behavior. Also, the attacks toward "Turbo Nocks"/Nick are in very poor taste. Good grief, the guy is bending over backyard to try and correct his testing and still he gets attacked. He then gets attacked on his own product and naturally enough wants to defend himself and then gets even more attacked. I then defend Nick and I get attacked in turn. Pack mentality of a bunch of school yard bullies.


----------



## David Alford

I have to say, the theory I am trying to make $$$ my getting more hits to Traditional Bowhunter or my article somehow is the funniest thing I've read in a long time. Thanks, that really made my day as I'm not even a subscriber. Hilarious. You guys are too much. I'm currently in the Philippines and have better things to do, but this was very entertaining to say the least.


----------



## turbonockguy

grantmac said:


> I think the product and it's shills speak for themselves, even when the world really wants to stop hearing.
> 
> One sells an idea which he hasn't proved exists, despite years of telling the world it was just around the corner.
> The other sells engineering which he admits to not having the engineering knowledge (or apparently basic math skills) to evaluate.
> 
> -Grant


all you need to do is stop reading this! No one is making you.


----------



## olddogrib

I regret to say, I am now relatively certain this thread will outlive LW's infamous "you can't kill a dead cow with field points"!


----------



## GEREP

olddogrib said:


> you can't kill a dead cow with field points!


I think it actually might be possible now that we have limbs capable of 250 fps @ 8.5 gpp. 

At that speed, you might even be able kill a dead cow with a blunt.

:wink:

KPC


----------



## Matt_Potter

grantmac said:


> I see shill #1 has arrived, shocked it took this long.


Pretty sure he is #2 - #1 was some guy who went by the handle "vermontster13" or something like that. 

Matt


----------



## Jim Casto Jr

Matt_Potter said:


> Pretty sure he is #2 - #1 was some guy who went by the handle "vermontster13" or something like that.
> 
> Matt



lol lol Now that's funny. Actually, the first was a guy went by Sackette, or something like that. lol lol


----------



## Matt_Potter

So Vermonster was #2 and Sackette was #1???

Pretty high turn over rate - wonder why??

Matt


----------



## David Alford

Well, Matt consider that TradTalk thread this comment from Lee Vivian who no longer works for TradTech:
"I do not want to turn this thread into a negative vein, but you stated something that personally called my character into question. You stated that you had problems with the limbs in your camp at Compton, and the TradTech rep wanted nothing to do with you or your problem...I realize you have had a personal agenda with TradTech and LAS from the outset, but I will not sit and let you make untrue allegations concerning my professionalism and integrity. Although there are many reasons why I left the business, I can assure you that dealing with people like you and scooter helped make the decision easier.Since I am no longer in the business, I can sit back and chuckle at some of the mistruths and lies that get posted.."

Here is what Bob Morrison wrote, referring to the way Randy tried to get remedy from BS: "I think if you would try to work with the bowyer before you go to Tradtalk and start a war of words, down grading everyone who doesn't have your take on the subject. Try talking with the bowyers to solve the problem not be part of it. I bet you wouldn't be out $1600 if you had.. And I'm not the only one that thinks that..."

Randy is probably a nice guy in person, but he did this all the wrong way. If you "slap" at a person do you think this is the best way to address a problem? And for others here to post on this limb fitting incident that happened to someone else's order five years ago as relevant to the present topic of Turbo's chrono test is beyond pathetic. It's an obvious toxic attempt to tear down a bowyer you don't know, haven't met or even spoken to.


----------



## Matt_Potter

David Alford said:


> Well, Matt consider that TradTalk thread this comment from Lee Vivian who no longer works for TradTech:
> "I do not want to turn this thread into a negative vein, but you stated something that personally called my character into question. You stated that you had problems with the limbs in your camp at Compton, and the TradTech rep wanted nothing to do with you or your problem...I realize you have had a personal agenda with TradTech and LAS from the outset, but I will not sit and let you make untrue allegations concerning my professionalism and integrity. Although there are many reasons why I left the business, I can assure you that dealing with people like you and scooter helped make the decision easier.Since I am no longer in the business, I can sit back and chuckle at some of the mistruths and lies that get posted.."
> 
> Here is what Bob Morrison wrote, referring to the way Randy tried to get remedy from BS: "I think if you would try to work with the bowyer before you go to Tradtalk and start a war of words, down grading everyone who doesn't have your take on the subject. Try talking with the bowyers to solve the problem not be part of it. I bet you wouldn't be out $1600 if you had.. And I'm not the only one that thinks that..."
> 
> Randy is probably a nice guy in person, but he did this all the wrong way. If you "slap" at a person do you think this is the best way to address a problem? And for others here to post on this limb fitting incident that happened to someone else's order five years ago as relevant to the present topic of Turbo's chrono test is beyond pathetic. It's an obvious toxic attempt to tear down a bowyer you don't know, haven't met or even spoken to.


What drugs are you taking - tradtech, Morrison?? Where did I ever reference either brand?? Both Lee and Bob are good stand up guys. 

Matt


----------



## David Alford

I was obviously giving an example of why there is a turnover in this industry per your prior post. There are a lot of toxic people who seek to inject their toxicity into tearing down people based on one sided views and mistruths. 

Bob Morrison's comments were cited all who keep bringing up Randy's complaint. He didn't handle it correctly and Bob correctly noted that. Let's move on to the relevant subject of Turbo's chrono testing and i would urge all to keep it civil, he's trying to do a better test I think that is clearly apparent.


----------



## ismo131

There is adverdising and spammail. Good advert is when you say what you say and then turn silent to world speak for it. To many ad and it turns spam


----------



## voodoofire1

I am truly flabbergasted that this has went on for 24 pages, sure do have short memories......And Mr. Alford, let Arvid be pissed off all he wants, there are a whole lot of fellas out there just as pissed at him, as Rusty isn't the only one left holding an amazing bow....


----------



## David Alford

ismo131 said:


> There is adverdising and spammail. Good advert is when you say what you say and then turn silent to world speak for it. To many ad and it turns spam


I have no monetary connection to Black Swan or Turbo nocks, so you're wrong. It's an issue of toxic personal attacks, plain and simple. The solution is not to complain about defensive replies, but rather to stop the antagonistic personal criticism posts.


----------



## David Alford

voodoofire1 said:


> I am truly flabbergasted that this has went on for 24 pages, sure do have short memories......And Mr. Alford, let Arvid be pissed off all he wants, there are a whole lot of fellas out there just as pissed at him, as Rusty isn't the only one left holding an amazing bow....


Why are you flabbergasted when critics like you KEEP POSTING PERSONAL ATTACK IRRELEVANT TO THE TOPIC?

I'm sure Arvid does have some ticked off customers. I had a solar energy business and busted my arse to make everyone happy and I couldn't. I had ticked off customers, a handful out of hundred and hundres of satisfied customers. You cannot make everyone happy. I respect Bob Morrison and I know he's had customers go online and complain about his customer service. Lee Vivian made the same point. You cannot please everyone and what you should take into account is that in many cases the public complaint is one sided.


----------



## David Alford

Also, I never said Arvid was "pissed". I think he just has a policy not to reply in public and that the way to remedy an issue is to phone him. Isn't that fairly obvious? Again, this was a bow limb fitting issue that wasn't even your order and it happened 5 yrs. ago. Why in the world are you making an issue of it when the topic was a chrono test? 

I'll tell you. It's because many here cannot resist injecting toxicity into others, even people they don't know, have never met, and haven't even spoken to. And they simply can't stop defending their toxicity and even injecting more...this is a side of human nature that pollutes one thread after another all across the internet almost regardless of topic. The drive to inflict negativity...here's some simple advice, become a positive person. The benefits are many and the drawbacks few.


----------



## David Alford

"You cannot please everyone"...I'll correct myself. You can if you have a small customer base, do perfect work every time, and let people walk over you. Please note that perfect work every time is insufficient. Is the product or service provider always correct? Of course not, but trust the general public pretty much follows a bell shaped curve in the validity of their complaints. Some are not justified, many are somewhat legitimate, and some are totally wacko.


----------



## David Alford

Should read "some are completely justified, many are somewhat legitimate and some are totally wacko.


----------



## ismo131

^^^, ^ thats trolling


----------



## ismo131

I seen this before that someone who wanna sell something argue in forum and there bisnes take downfall because Angry costomers.


----------



## Matt_Potter

Not my prose (someone far smarter than me wrote this) but it seems quite applicable 


______________________________________________________________________________________________________________


STAR Belly Archers

The Archers
*
Now, the Star-Recurve Archers had recurves with stars.
The Plain-recurve Archers had none upon thars.
*
Those stars weren’t so big. They were really so small
you might think such a thing wouldn’t matter at all.
*
But, because they had stars, all the Star-Recurve Archers
would brag, “We’re the best of Trad Archery Archers.”
With their snoots in the air, they would sniff and they’d snort
“We’ll have nothing to do with the Plain-Recurve sort!”
And, whenever they met some, when they were out walking,
They’d hike right on past them without even talking.
*
When the Star-Recurve children went out to "aim small",
Could a Plain-Recurve get in the game? Not at all.
You only could play if your recurves had stars
and the Plain-Recurve children had none upon thars.
*
When the Star Recurve Archers had frankfurter roasts
Or picnics or shoot-offs or marshmallow toasts,
They never invited the Plain-Recurve Archers
They left them out cold, in the dark of the marshes.
They kept them away. Never let them come near.
And that’s how they treated them year after year.
*
Then ONE day, it seems while the Plain-Recurve Archers
Were moping and doping away from the targets,
Just sitting there wishing their recurves had stars,
A stranger zipped up in the strangest of cars!
*
“My friends”, he announced in a voice clear and clean,
“My name is Sylvester McTradcop McBean.
And I’ve heard of your troubles. I’ve heard you’re unhappy.
But I can fix that because I’m the Fix-It-Up Chappie.**
*
I’ve come here to help you. I have what you need.
And my prices are low. And I work with great speed.
And my work is one hundred per cent guaranteed!”
*
Then, quickly, Sylvester McTradcop McBean
put together a very peculiar machine.
And he said, “You want stars like a Star-Recurve leach?
My friends, you can have them for three dollars each!”
*
“Just pay me your money and hop right aboard!”
So they clambered inside. Then the big machine roared.
And it klonked. And it bonked. And it jerked. And it berked.
And it bopped them about. But the thing really worked!
When the Plain-Recurve Archers popped out, they had stars!
They actually did. They had stars upon thars!
*
Then they yelled at the ones who had stars from the start,
"We're exactly like you; you can't tell us apart.
We're all just the same now, you snooty old smarties.
Now we can come to your frankfurter parties!"
*
"Good grief!" groaned the one who had stars from the first.
"We're still the best Archers, and they are the worst.
But how in the world will we know," they all frowned,
"if which kind is what or the other way 'round?"
*
Then up stepped McBean with a very sly wink,
and he said, "Things are not quite as bad as you think.
You don't know who's who, that is perfectly true.
But come with me, friends, do you know what I'll do?
I'll make you again the best Archers on beaches,
and all it will cost you is ten dollars eaches.
*
“Recurve stars are no longer in style”, said McBean.
“What you need is a trip through my Star-Off Machine.
This wondrous contraption will take OFF your stars
So you won’t look like Archers that have them on thars.”

And that handy machine, working very precisely,
Removed all the stars from their recurves quite nicely. *
Then, with snoots in the air, they paraded about.
And they opened their beaks and they let out a shout,
“We know who is who! Now there isn’t a doubt.
The best kind of Archers are Archers without!”
*
Then, of course, those with stars got all frightfully mad.
To shoot a star recurve was frightfully bad.
Then, of course, old Sylvester McTradcop McBean
invited THEM into his Star-Off Machine.
*
And, of course from THEN on, as you probably guess,
Things really got into a horrible mess. *
All the rest of that day, by those poor empty targets,
The Fix-It-Up Tradcop kept fixing up Archers.

Off again! On again! In again! Out again!
Through the machines they raced round and about again,
Changing their stars every minute or two.
They kept paying money.* They kept running through.
Until neither the Plain nor the Star-Recurves knew
whether this one was that one or that one was this one.
*Or which one was what one or what one was who.
*
Then, when every last cent of their money was spent,
The Fix-It-Up Tradcop packed up. And he went.
And he laughed as he drove
in his car past the target,
“They never will learn.
No. You can’t teach trad archers!”
*
But McBean was quite wrong. I’m quite happy to say.
That the Archers got really quite smart on that day.
That day, all the Archers forgot about stars and whether
They had one, or not, upon thars.
*


----------



## turbonockguy

I almost hate to post this but I will keep my commitment . It is warming up finally and it is raining and the snow is melting. So today I did a video check based on what I had said I would do.(shot indoors)

Earlier I had tested my high speed camera ( claimed to do 1000 frames per second) I did a video of a digital stopwatch with the camera and found it was doing 995 
frames per second. (pretty close) I posted that video here a few weeks ago.


I decided when I do the outdoor shooting with my two cell chrono to also do high speed video and should be able to count frames do also determine speed,
today I did an experiment.
I set up the shooting machine . with the 39 lb at 30 inches black swan. I put up a board with 3 vertical lines one foot apart. I then shot a 30 inch arrow , but only drew it 28 inches.it weighed 290 grains bareshaft. (9.6 grains per inch) 
Now here is where it gets a little creepy.
I did the video and then ran it through my Sony Vegas editor and counted frames. It did 12 frames in 3 ft. 4 frames in one ft. that = 4/1000 second for each ft of travel.
That comes out to 250 feet per second ?????????? I then did it with the actual camera speed 4/995 second and got a speed of 248.75 feet per second.

That seems a little fast???
So In the next two or three days I will set up outdoors in the sunlight and do a chrono and camera test shoot. with different grain weight arrows. 

Anyone who has a video editor that counts frames can count the frames on the you tube, and verify . Use the first (raw) footage. the second time I slowed the shot down and that adds frames. ( If you can not use the you tube, contact me and I will send you the video in most any format you want. )

I am going to re test the frame speed of the camera again. just to be sure it is giving good data.

Hopefully the chronograph and the high speed camera will give somewhat matching data.


----------



## JParanee

This is insanity


----------



## Aronnax

turbonockguy said:


> I almost hate to post this but I will keep my commitment . It is warming up finally and it is raining and the snow is melting. So today I did a video check based on what I had said I would do.(shot indoors)
> 
> Earlier I had tested my high speed camera ( claimed to do 1000 frames per second) I did a video of a digital stopwatch with the camera and found it was doing 995
> frames per second. (pretty close) I posted that video here a few weeks ago.
> 
> 
> I decided when I do the outdoor shooting with my two cell chrono to also do high speed video and should be able to count frames do also determine speed,
> today I did an experiment.
> I set up the shooting machine . with the 39 lb at 30 inches black swan. I put up a board with 3 vertical lines one foot apart. I then shot a 30 inch arrow , but only drew it 28 inches.it weighed 290 grains bareshaft. (9.6 grains per inch)
> Now here is where it gets a little creepy.
> I did the video and then ran it through my Sony Vegas editor and counted frames. It did 12 frames in 3 ft. 4 frames in one ft. that = 4/1000 second for each ft of travel.
> That comes out to 250 feet per second ?????????? I then did it with the actual camera speed 4/995 second and got a speed of 248.75 feet per second.
> 
> That seems a little fast???
> So In the next two or three days I will set up outdoors in the sunlight and do a chrono and camera test shoot. with different grain weight arrows.
> 
> Anyone who has a video editor that counts frames can count the frames on the you tube, and verify . Use the first (raw) footage. the second time I slowed the shot down and that adds frames. ( If you can not use the you tube, contact me and I will send you the video in most any format you want. )
> 
> I am going to re test the frame speed of the camera again. just to be sure it is giving good data.
> 
> Hopefully the chronograph and the high speed camera will give somewhat matching data.


40 KE out of a 40lb bow is HIGHLY suspect- Unless it's got wheels on it or super recurve limbs (Border) but you absolutely refuse to post a detailed dfc... 

BM


----------



## ghostgoblin22

not sure why you chrono arrows that only weigh 290 grains....thats not a realistic arrow for a traditional bow let alone a compound bow


----------



## Matt_Potter

JParanee said:


> This is insanity












Little kitty porn for you JP - that makes everything better. 

This is that 170 lb Tom we caught.


----------



## ranchoarcher

More contrived bumblings. 
A bow rated at 39 pounds at 30 inches drawn to 28 (less than 39lbs on the string) gives over 40lbs of KE on the arrow. Yup, I believe ya. 

Ghostgoblin2, it isn't too uncommon to use light arrows like that. Mine are 260 grains for a 40lb hoyt tiburon that I use for competition. Best speed I ever got was around 210 or so. I was too poor to afford the warp drive upgrade though.


----------



## ghostgoblin22

ranchoarcher said:


> More contrived bumblings.
> A bow rated at 39 pounds at 30 inches drawn to 28 (less than 39lbs on the string) gives over 40lbs of KE on the arrow. Yup, I believe ya.
> 
> Ghostgoblin2, it isn't too uncommon to use light arrows like that. Mine are 260 grains for a 40lb hoyt tiburon that I use for competition. Best speed I ever got was around 210 or so. I was too poor to afford the warp drive upgrade though.


yeah i understand that, i also use arrows that weigh 270 grains for my competition bow, but isnt black swan bows advertised as hunting bows correct?


----------



## JParanee

Matt_Potter said:


> Little kitty porn for you JP - that makes everything better.
> 
> This is that 170 lb Tom we caught.


Matt 

That pic is the best thing that has happened to this thread since its inception 

Turbo do you realize that your really doing a lot of damage to both your prouduct and BS's 

After this kind of testing you are only making people wonder about your own testing of your nocks 

I'm not trying to be mean I'm just being truthful


----------



## David Alford

Matt, launching yet another personal attack? Why do you want to be a toxic person?


----------



## David Alford

JParanee said:


> Matt
> 
> Turbo do you realize that your really doing a lot of damage to both your prouduct and BS's
> 
> After this kind of testing you are only making people wonder about your own testing of your nocks
> 
> I'm not trying to be mean I'm just being truthful


Jparanee, I disagree and find your comments to be another personal attack on two companies as well as on Nick. Why not just neutrally say you disagree with the test and make your suggestions as to arrow weight or whatever and see if Nick will oblige you? Do you guys even realize your personal attacks are so habitual that it seems you can't continue making them?


----------



## Sanford

Common sense ought to tell someone who's got any experience that it ain't going near 250fps. There's no need to even not question the method used and every reason to disregard your finding. A 250pfs bow is easy to tell from a recurve just by visualization - see the arrow fly, read 250pfs, and know that unless you are holding a compound bow, something is amiss. Posting it up for discussion makes no sense unless you are telling folks how incorrect a method the camera is.


----------



## David Alford

ismo131 said:


> I seen this before that someone who wanna sell something argue in forum and there bisnes take downfall because Angry costomers.


No customers are contributing to this topic except Nick and myself and we are very happy with the product. Rather it is people who don't know Arvid, haven't even met him or spoken with him who are criticizing him in this thread. I find this truly bizarre and the only explanation is that some people are simply toxic and enjoying tearing down others who are actually doing something in archery. 

Further, if the critics were interested in the truth about the bow, all of their emphasis would be on the bow and the chrono tests. That's obviously not the case.


----------



## David Alford

Sanford said:


> Common sense ought to tell someone who's got any experience that it ain't going near 250fps. There's no need to even not question the method used and every reason to disregard your finding. A 250pfs bow is easy to tell from a recurve just by visualization - see the arrow fly, read 250pfs, and know that unless you are holding a compound bow, something is amiss. Posting it up for discussion makes no sense unless you are telling folks how incorrect a method the camera is.


You may be very well correct, but Nick didn't claim to have complete confidence in it, rather he questioned it himself. A scientific approach is to present the data as it is and then to re-examine the methodology and see if there is a problem. It is a mistake to start cherry picking data at the onset.


----------



## David Alford

Let me make a simple observation. Rather than being mad at Nick, Arvid, myself, or the bow in question maybe you guys should be mad at chrono manufacturers. Maybe that is the product that deserves the bulk of criticism.


----------



## JParanee

It's not a personal attack he is doing a grave disservice to both companies 

My opinion 

Go set up a poll and ask this very question 

is turbo hurting or helping BS Bows 

I think the answer will suprise you


----------



## Sanford

David Alford said:


> You may be very well correct, but Nick didn't claim to have complete confidence in it, rather he questioned it himself. A scientific approach is to present the data as it is and then to re-examine the methodology and see if there is a problem. It is a mistake to start cherry picking data at the onset.


He should get about what Arvid did, around 190pfs. Maybe Nick will get 200, maybe 210 with lighter arrow, and maybe 220 with even super light arrow. Why don't he just call it a fast bow, drop all the worry about till the snow melts, and give a review of a high priced cast aluminum bow with carbon recurve limbs? Maybe someone will buy one based on that, maybe not. If he's looking to cherry pick data to back into his original belief (post #1) that a 250pfs was in his hands, it just ain't going to happen.


----------



## Attack

David Alford said:


> Also, I never said Arvid was "pissed". I think he just has a policy not to reply in public and that the way to remedy an issue is to phone him. Isn't that fairly obvious? Again, this was a bow limb fitting issue that wasn't even your order and it happened 5 yrs. ago. Why in the world are you making an issue of it when the topic was a chrono test?
> 
> I'll tell you. It's because many here cannot resist injecting toxicity into others, even people they don't know, have never met, and haven't even spoken to. And they simply can't stop defending their toxicity and even injecting more...this is a side of human nature that pollutes one thread after another all across the internet almost regardless of topic. The drive to inflict negativity...here's some simple advice, become a positive person. The benefits are many and the drawbacks few.


It was brought up because you asked JP about a tongue in cheek comment, he said if you want to know you can go to the source. Then you got persistent and gave some inaccurate info. So YOU were givin a link to the original conversation. It's Rusty not Randy... You were the one that brought that out and wouldn't let it go... Cheers. Oh and you seem to be the most toxic here... If you really don't like it you really don't have to read it. Have a lovely day.


David Alford said:


> Also, I never said Arvid was "pissed". I think he just has a policy not to reply in public and that the way to remedy an issue is to phone him. Isn't that fairly obvious? Again, this was a bow limb fitting issue that wasn't even your order and it happened 5 yrs. ago. Why in the world are you making an issue of it when the topic was a chrono test?
> 
> I'll tell you. It's because many here cannot resist injecting toxicity into others, even people they don't know, have never met, and haven't even spoken to. And they simply can't stop defending their toxicity and even injecting more...this is a side of human nature that pollutes one thread after another all across the internet almost regardless of topic. The drive to inflict negativity...here's some simple advice, become a positive person. The benefits are many and the drawbacks few.


It was brought up because you asked JP about a tongue in cheek comment, he said if you want to know you can go to the source. Then you got persistent and gave some inaccurate info. So YOU were givin a link to the original conversation. It's Rusty not Randy... You were the one that brought that out and wouldn't let it go... Cheers. Oh and you seem to be the most toxic here... If you really don't like it you really don't have to read it. Have a lovely day.


----------



## Matt_Potter

David Alford said:


> Matt, launching yet another personal attack? Why do you want to be a toxic person?


That's me toxic to the core. The wonderful thing about the Internet is your statements are there for ever. I have no problem with people researching everything I have ever said. Can you say the same?? 

All anyone needs to do is search "the star method" on any of the major trade websites and they can read pages and pages of your statements - then come to their own conclusions. 

You have been blowing smoke for years you really can't expect people to take you even remotely serious at this point. You and black swan are a perfect match.


----------



## Matt_Potter

Little more kitty porn for us


----------



## graysquirrel

Here Matt, this should fit


----------



## grander

David Alford said:


> Let me make a simple observation. Rather than being mad at Nick, Arvid, myself, or the bow in question maybe you guys should be mad at chrono manufacturers. Maybe that is the product that deserves the bulk of criticism.


Who cares about the chrono? That's a weak stance from someone spewing ridiculous unfounded and knowingly wrong info.


----------



## Matt_Potter

graysquirrel said:


> Here Matt, this should fit


Perfect - looks like a good place to blow smoke LOL


----------



## turbonockguy

Aronnax said:


> 40 KE out of a 40lb bow is HIGHLY suspect- Unless it's got wheels on it or super recurve limbs (Border) but you absolutely refuse to post a detailed dfc...
> 
> BM


I am really working at getting this right!!!

This morning I shot video of a digital timer again and recorded six seconds with the high speed camera.
I got exactly 1000 frames for each second.
Since each frame covers about 3 inches of flight I am going to put grid lines on my board at 3 inches. so I can get a little more data. when I do the test shots .


The reason I used the arrow I did and the draw length I used to do the camera test had nothing to do with Ibo,fita, or any of the specs. I just wanted to get video at 1000 frames per second again and verify the camera was accurate. it was!

When I do the shooting outdoors in sunlight with the two cell chrono and the camera I hope to have matching data.

When I do the outdoor shooting. I will start with the IBO at 5 grains per inch, 30 inch draw 39 lb bow. (I will also re test the bow on the scale and re weigh the arrow on the grain scale on camera!) I am going to do each process on video so you can see I am not cheating! or blowing smoke! Whatever the results are you will see them.

I will be out of town on business for this weekend so if all goes well I will start the testing Monday.

Remember! I can not control the weather.
This is my back yard three days ago with another visitor.


----------



## turbonockguy

I was just thinking . this crazy thread is up to almost 20,000 views. Only a small number of folks post,repeatedly. some complain they can not imagine why this keeps going, yet those who complain keep posting? I wonder what those who do not post think of this? I wonder what they think of their fellow archers?


For me this is not about winning or losing an argument. It is about getting it right. (whether you chose to believe that or not.) When I get my testing done I will see if I can find an unbiased tester who most can agree is qualified to also do testing.


----------



## David Alford

JParanee said:


> It's not a personal attack he is doing a grave disservice to both companies
> 
> My opinion
> 
> Go set up a poll and ask this very question
> 
> is turbo hurting or helping BS Bows
> 
> I think the answer will suprise you


That's because this thread is being dominated by toxic individuals and that's what I object to. There was NO reason personally attack Arvid or his customer service or to attack Nick and his product or to launch into attacks referencing my shooting method. All of these personal attacks are not relevant to the topic of the chrono test. IMO, Nick's honesty and willingness to retest and to even offer the bow for others to test is obvious. What we have had here is a gang attack by a bunch of toxic negative individuals and sadly this is all to common on archer forums as well as the internet in general. 

The solution to all of these attacks and rebuttals is so simple. Just stop attacking people personally. Ask Nick courteously how you would like him to test the bow and he may very well oblige you. And I won't have anything to say because no defense of Arvid or Nick or myself will be unnecessary in a polite & reasonable inquiry/discussion.


----------



## David Alford

grander said:


> Who cares about the chrono? That's a weak stance from someone spewing ridiculous unfounded and knowingly wrong info.


What do you mean who cares about the chrono? It is precisely the chrono results that initially had everyone up in arms. Now you claim that's a weak point? And you then interject emotional words such as "spewing", "ridiculous", "unfounded", and "knowingly wrong"? 

Again, just stop the personal attacks, politely or neutrally suggest how you think the chrono tests should be done and we may get somewhere.


----------



## David Alford

Matt_Potter said:


> That's me toxic to the core. The wonderful thing about the Internet is your statements are there for ever. I have no problem with people researching everything I have ever said. Can you say the same??
> 
> All anyone needs to do is search "the star method" on any of the major trade websites and they can read pages and pages of your statements - then come to their own conclusions.
> 
> You have been blowing smoke for years you really can't expect people to take you even remotely serious at this point. You and black swan are a perfect match.


There you go again posting another personal attack on a subject that has absolutely no relevance to the subject of chrono testing this bow. If you wish to post on the STAR Method, it belongs on a new thread.


----------



## David Alford

Matt_Potter said:


> That's me toxic to the core. The wonderful thing about the Internet is your statements are there for ever. I have no problem with people researching everything I have ever said. Can you say the same??
> 
> Yes, I can say that because I've always told the truth and ultimately I will be vindicated other than for my overly optimistic time lines. And if you research my archery posts of which there are probably thousands, mosts have been on any number of topics unrelated to my shooting method.
> 
> The relevant point here is your behavior on this thread. I try not to carry grudges from one thread to another and for the most part look at someone posts now vs. what they posted in another thread or at another time.
> 
> Therefore, I'm calling you out for being a negative and toxic person in your posts here. You are doing all you can it seems to hit out and harm people. Are you proud of this?
> You're taking your life for granted, at some point I think you may deeply regret not being nicer to people especially on what amounts to minor issues on a minor topic. What do you gain from this? It hurts you more than anyone, really. No one totally escapes the bad they do in this world. I'm not making judgement on the rest of your life, but you are indeed toxic in your posts here and the world needs positive energy not negative energy.


----------



## David Alford

"...will be unnecessary in a polite & reasonable inquiry/discussion.


should read "necessary".


----------



## David Alford

Let me make this very simple suggestion. Let's all stop personal attacks and I will stop rebuttals. Let's address the subject of this thread which was chrono testing. Fair enough?

I think Nick's posts shows he is trying to get things right. What suggestions do you have for him in this testing in the days ahead? Let him try to oblige what you want him to test within reason.


----------



## ghostgoblin22

do real world tests instead of Bull chit tests


----------



## turbonockguy

ghostgoblin22 said:


> do real world tests instead of Bull chit tests


And what would a "real world test " be for you?


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> And what would a "real world test " be for you?


Why not work off Arvid's 190fps test? He's the bowyer. Seems doable if one pushes it. You might get 5% different readings one way or the other, depending.

If you get any number that is wildly out of place, disregard it as error. 

Trying to "match" what you deducted from a camera is just a rabbit chase, or red-herring, or, changing the test standard. That's how you get off on bad data, one bad number leads to another, but, you know that already.


----------



## Myth Buster

Hi Guys, I must say your thread here has been very entertaining to say the least! 

Mr Turbonock, This is just a simple suggestion for you so take it or leave it but may help others reading this or the ones that are interested in the truth. If anything may help diffuse the situation a little
Try setting up an exactly weighted 9grain per lb arrow to the bows draw weight at PRECISELY 28". And DO NOT just read the marked weight on the limb and go with what it says. Have that bow measured with a fairly good (and calibrated)digital scale. Then make up an arrow (yes this can take some time) to exactly 9gpp of the bows draw weight at 28".

Then mark the arrow from the throat of the nock out 28" and draw a nice bright white ring around it at 28". Then while finger shooting the bow through the crono, draw the white ring to the back of the bow doing your very best to watch and line this up with the back of the bow before release. Take several shots to get an average. Sometimes having a few buddies helping you by standing beside the bow to see that you are not short drawing or over drawing can help the results be more consistent. 
And it never hurts to trade places with your buddies shooting the bow to further confirm consistencies as well as do the very same test with some other popular bow for reference.

People dont want fluffed numbers from testing parameters that are not realistic to real world use results. The internet makes people really smart to that these days. 

Ya gotta realize that being in the archery business these days is like swimming with sharks every day! Im afraid you have chummed the waters my friend and my best advice is either get a bigger boat, or stay out of the water. I mean that in the most sincere and respectful manner. :wink:

Good day


----------



## David Alford

MythBuster, i think those are good suggestions. I've also suggested Nick send the bow to a well respected neutral party. I don't know if the BS will be one of top 5 fastest or whatever, but IMO it is very fast with the combination of an extremely smooth draw vs. some of the draw curves attributed to some of the other top speed bows.


----------



## ranchoarcher

Mythbuster, ya need to re-check you're post. The 28 inch measurement isn't to the throat of the bow. It's from the deepest part of the grip plus 1.75 inches for the 28 total. Usually the front of the riser in front of the grip for a lot of bows. Doing it your way would yield a near 30 inch draw and post up some more funny numbers. That's the kind of misguided math that's lead to where this thread is. You, Alford, and turbo can figure it out. :set1_STOOGE2:

I'm going :set1_fishing:


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Ranch, after all this time you would think they would of figure that out by now. By the way thanks for the offer the do the test for them, nice shop. I thought it best to thank you myself. But at this point I am not sure that will ever happen. This thread just need to die. We are not helping archers with the type of communication/testing. 
Guys just let it go please.
Dan


----------



## Myth Buster

ranchoarcher said:


> Mythbuster, ya need to re-check you're post. The 28 inch measurement isn't to the throat of the bow. It's from the deepest part of the grip plus 1.75 inches for the 28 total. Usually the front of the riser in front of the grip for a lot of bows. Doing it your way would yield a near 30 inch draw and post up some more funny numbers. That's the kind of misguided math that's lead to where this thread is. You, Alford, and turbo can figure it out. :set1_STOOGE2:
> 
> I'm going :set1_fishing:


OOPS! Good catch Ranch!!! My badd on that! I should have clarified that a little better about scaling the bow. Pull down 26-1/4" from the throat of the grip to get the actual draw weight for 28"


----------



## newell38

ranchoarcher said:


> Mythbuster, ya need to re-check you're post. The 28 inch measurement isn't to the throat of the bow. It's from the deepest part of the grip plus 1.75 inches for the 28 total. Usually the front of the riser in front of the grip for a lot of bows. Doing it your way would yield a near 30 inch draw and post up some more funny numbers. That's the kind of misguided math that's lead to where this thread is. You, Alford, and turbo can figure it out. :set1
> 
> I'm going :set1_fishing:


I think you need to check myth busters post again. Never mentioned throat of the grip?


----------



## David Alford

DDSHOOTER said:


> Ranch, after all this time you would think they would of figure that out by now. By the way thanks for the offer the do the test for them, nice shop. I thought it best to thank you myself. But at this point I am not sure that will ever happen. This thread just need to die. We are not helping archers with the type of communication/testing.
> Guys just let it go please.
> Dan


Who is "they"? Mythbuster is the "they" in this instance and an example that these tests are far from intuitive to get everything right to satisfy everyone. I'm not an expert either but there is no point on giving up if the experts here can agree as to how the test should be done.

We do have Mullaney's report on the older BS limbs:

"I was surprised at the high levels of dynamic efficiency that you have achieved with this design, particularly the fact that they increased as draw length and draw weight were reduced. To cover the entire range of shootable arrow weight (360 to 650-grains) essentially with dynamic efficiencies over the 80 percent level is really remarkable. At 26-inches and 50.2 lbs, dynamic efficiency level of 88.96 percent is truly a notable achievement. I cannot recall testing a bow of any type that could match that level of efficiency."


----------



## newell38

He did mention throat of the nock though....I see how one could get confused. No biggy


----------



## DDSHOOTER

David, if your really trying to help Nick then PM him with a copy of Mullaney's report on the older BS limbs or any for that matter. In order him to follow Scientifically. Then you can be part of they that try to help. 
Myth Buster has two post and both are here. ?
Dan


----------



## DDSHOOTER

My bad, Myth Buster. I know your trying to help.
Dan


----------



## David Alford

The full Mullaney report is not available to me, but I suggested Nick send the bow to Blacky Schwarze to test. However, it seems Blacky got tired of all the flack he was getting (shock!) and doing it for free so he stopped.

In another thread on ArcheryTalk, [email protected] commented:

"From the front of the chrono...be far enough away so the arrow clears the string prior to hitting the trap in the chrono.

Place the target far enough from the chrono so the arrow clears the traps prior to hitting the target and slowing down.

Place an aiming point on the target for reference, situate so you clear the chrono and screen supports. Shoot at the exact same spot for each string of arrows. At three to four feet, you should be hitting in the same hole. If you're not, then your arrow is going over the traps in different locations and will give different readings. 

Lighting has a definate effect on chrono results. I've seen +-10fps swings on a partly cloudy day when clouds fully, partially, or didn't obscure the sun. If you're outdoors with clouds, wait for full sun to make a shot string.

Chronos at different shops may not be "calibrated" to the same source or may just be out of calibration. The result will be varying read outs unless the chronos a calibrated to each other.

When 3D events make you chrono your bow, they give a 3% leeway at 280fps..so they allow 288fps. At 300fps 3% = 309fps, 330fps 3% = ~340fps.

A difference in even 1-2fps can cause marks to be off on a sight tape. Using software and a chrono to make a sight tape will only get you close...unless the software and chrono are calibrated to each other. If not, then the most accurate method to make a sight tape is from 2 (or more) shot in marks. The sight tape will match your marks, but might not necessarily agree with your chrono."

Another person in this thread stated he observed chrono test variances of 10 fps from different chronographs. It's obvious this is not an exact science although with enough money to use different chronographs and to follow a strict protocol, it is all solvable. I do not that Nick was trying to achieve better testing but there are inherent problems as one can see.

We are left with the highly regarded Herb Mullaney's report on older and slower BS limbs that nevertheless yielded very high limb efficiencies, and if the new limbs are just a bit more efficient that would take them to 90% dynamic efficiency which seems incredible. Or else Mullaney's testing was somehow invalid. I do know the new limbs are extremely light and they are definitely faster than the BS limbs I had from a bow Arvid made just a year ago. I won't speculate how much faster.


----------



## David Alford

"I do not that Nick was trying to achieve better testing" should read: I do know that Nick was trying to achieve better testing...


----------



## turbonockguy

Myth Buster said:


> Hi Guys, I must say your thread here has been very entertaining to say the least!
> 
> Mr Turbonock, This is just a simple suggestion for you so take it or leave it but may help others reading this or the ones that are interested in the truth. If anything may help diffuse the situation a little
> Try setting up an exactly weighted 9grain per lb arrow to the bows draw weight at PRECISELY 28". And DO NOT just read the marked weight on the limb and go with what it says. Have that bow measured with a fairly good (and calibrated)digital scale. Then make up an arrow (yes this can take some time) to exactly 9gpp of the bows draw weight at 28".
> 
> Then mark the arrow from the throat of the nock out 28" and draw a nice bright white ring around it at 28". Then while finger shooting the bow through the crono, draw the white ring to the back of the bow doing your very best to watch and line this up with the back of the bow before release. Take several shots to get an average. Sometimes having a few buddies helping you by standing beside the bow to see that you are not short drawing or over drawing can help the results be more consistent.
> And it never hurts to trade places with your buddies shooting the bow to further confirm consistencies as well as do the very same test with some other popular bow for reference.
> 
> People dont want fluffed numbers from testing parameters that are not realistic to real world use results. The internet makes people really smart to that these days.
> 
> Ya gotta realize that being in the archery business these days is like swimming with sharks every day! Im afraid you have chummed the waters my friend and my best advice is either get a bigger boat, or stay out of the water. I mean that in the most sincere and respectful manner. :wink:
> 
> Good day


Thank you.
I already did that in my indoor tests. except that I drew the arrows to 30 inches.
I made up arrows at 10,9, 8,6,and 5 grains per inch.
I used a bow scale at 30 inches to get the draw weight of the bow.
What I am going to do as soon as I get outside, is shoot with the chrono in direct sunlight and do a minimum of five shots. I will video the weighing , drawing and shooting.
I am also going to do 1000 frames per second video and count the frames to see a different way of verification.
I did a 1000 frames per second video and got 4 frames per foot video of the arrow. which came out to 250 feet per second. I re checked the camera by doing video of a digital stopwatch that was showing time in thousndths of seconds and the camera was doing exactly 1000 frames per second.
The problem I may have is this 1000 frame per second scan may not be fast enough to get exact speeds .
I am going to put in inch marks on my measuring board I shoot past but since I get 3 inches of travel on each frame I will at least see if the speeds are consistent, but I may not get exact feet per second.
Arvid Suggested I shoot around noon time for the chrono to get the best results.
So as soon a I have a clear sunny day I will start.

A question for you. Which do you think will cause the least fuss here on Archery Talk.
Doing the shots at 28 inches or at 30 ?

The first one I am going to do is the 5 grains per inch IBO to address the one that seemed to cause the most fuss.


----------



## turbonockguy

Well it is snowing again. 
I was doing some thinking about Archery the sport!
Now there are over 20,000 hits on this ! It is either the 20 or so who post have looked 1000 times each, or I sit home all day clicking on this ! or 1000 folks have looked 20 times each, or 10,000 have looked two times.
I figure at least several thousand have looked at least once.
I wonder what they learned about our "sport" 
I have learned a great deal about a small number of people.
Some have been quite helpful. and I thank them. 
To me this is no longer about right or wrong, but about what is right. and how we treat our fellow man (even our fellow archers)
If you are right about something fine, if you are wrong about something fine. If you are right about something and act as if you are a jerk about it. You may be right but you are still a ?????.
I hope those who look and do not post do see that there are some posting here that are still sportsmen!


----------



## ismo131

20000 hits means that people like to wacth fights.


----------



## turbonockguy

ismo131 said:


> 20000 hits means that people like to wacth fights.


perhaps! but no data for sure is there. There are all kinds of people.


----------



## Myth Buster

*"A question for you. Which do you think will cause the least fuss here on Archery Talk.
Doing the shots at 28 inches or at 30 ?"*

Personally I suggest posting only the 28" numbers using 9 or 10 gpp arrows. (9gpp arrows are also realistic averages for hunting weight arrows)
The reason being is that "most" men average around 28" draws and can better relate to the numbers that you will see from your crono.

You had mentioned going outside with your crono. I would suggest staying indoors with it and use the supplied light system for accuracy and consistency. Even testing your results against a few different make cronos wouldn't be a bad idea. Ive heard from most manufacturers you can expect about a 3% margin of error between them. My personal experience with the 3 that I have owned was that they were almost exactly the same. Only 1 showed 1fps slower that the other two. Not familiar with your brand used in the vid.

To your above post (up 3)
Like I said earlier, Every day in this business is swimming with sharks, and sometimes the best thing you can say is what you dont. People simply wont be nearly as respectful to you from behind a keyboard and computer screen. Its unfortunate, but it seems to be the trend these days.
Maybe in the future I would just let Arvid do his own tests and make his own claims. 

Good day


----------



## David Alford

"To me this is no longer about right or wrong, but about what is right. and how we treat our fellow man (even our fellow archers)
If you are right about something fine, if you are wrong about something fine. If you are right about something and act as if you are a jerk about it. You may be right but you are still a ?????.
I hope those who look and do not post do see that there are some posting here that are still sportsmen!"

It's ok to be wrong. We all make mistakes. However, when someone is wrong and yet so casually try to destroy reputations and archery businesses that is going too far. There should always be room for doubt, esp. regarding what amounts to convicting people you have never even met or had dealings with. I humbly suggest they watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzPll63y2b0


----------



## Cold Weather

According to the Black Swan site they got a bow that 60 lbs 30 inch draw 540 gr arrow is 225 fps. I recall that used to be top performance in a compound. Ya sure


----------



## ranchoarcher

The problem is the bogus data was NOT pulled. That's what's got people who know it's crap in an uproar. That first WRONG video is still posted! This constant barrage of ad hominem directed at those who point it out isn't going to overshadow the simple fact that the results aren't true. It's one thing to do a vid like Jparanee did that is legit with results that aren't so over the top that it's outlandish. Yeah, maybe it's a pitch but at least it's delivered with honesty. I suspect the ad on the BS site is for a bow with a draw weight of 60lbs at 28 inches, not 30. That might get the magical 225 when the actual weight on the string is more like 68.


----------



## David Alford

Yes, the first wrong video is still posted, well maybe it can be pulled and then pull all the personal attacks, or how about the entire sorry thread because many here should be ashamed of their behaviour. Otherwise, the history of thread shows Nick correcting himself on the bogus results and his whole desire here is plain to show he wants the test to be accurate. OTHERWISE HE JUST WOULD HAVE POSTED THE INITIAL VIDEO AND LEFT. True?

I wish everyone who want the test to be done accurately say now what they want done as far as methodology and specifications and I'm sure Nick will try to oblige. Good grief, he has offered to send his bow to others to independently test but ahha the offers are not exactly rolling in. Why, because it's a pain in the arse to do the testing esp. when you know you'll have a bunch of critics jumping on your case if you don't make them perfectly happy.

So speak up now or forever stay quiet on how this test should be done. No wonder Blacky got out of bow testing, everyone's got an opinion on how you should do things and you can't make everyone happy. At least you can approach the testing objectively and with honesty and redo the testing to try to make it more accurate. This Nick has done and is still trying to do.


----------



## David Alford

"Personally I suggest posting only the 28" numbers using 9 or 10 gpp arrows. (9gpp arrows are also realistic averages for hunting weight arrows)
The reason being is that "most" men average around 28" draws and can better relate to the numbers that you will see from your crono."

Earlier in this thread I've already posted a link to precisely the test you advocate. That test/video is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AS7m7jSHrR0 The result is 191 fps with a 47#28" AMO drawn to 28" shooting 10 gpp (470 grs) arrow. I suspect with a brace height at the lower end of the standard recommended brace height and mechanical release and a dental floss nock with a draw of 30" the bow would almost certainly be well over 200 fps. That is smoking fast and done with a smooth draw curve vs. the type of draw curve Border uses. I'm not against Border bows at all and one of my friends (Yononindo) makes videos for Border bows and he loves his.


----------



## David Alford

Cold Weather said:


> According to the Black Swan site they got a bow that 60 lbs 30 inch draw 540 gr arrow is 225 fps. I recall that used to be top performance in a compound. Ya sure


Herb Mullaney's report showed 207 fps with 540 g arrow and I assume 30" draw. That was a long time ago. Are the new limbs 18 fps faster? I suspect they may be; they are significantly lighter and this is generations of limbs later.


----------



## turbonockguy

Myth Buster said:


> *"A question for you. Which do you think will cause the least fuss here on Archery Talk.
> Doing the shots at 28 inches or at 30 ?"*
> 
> Personally I suggest posting only the 28" numbers using 9 or 10 gpp arrows. (9gpp arrows are also realistic averages for hunting weight arrows)
> The reason being is that "most" men average around 28" draws and can better relate to the numbers that you will see from your crono.
> 
> You had mentioned going outside with your crono. I would suggest staying indoors with it and use the supplied light system for accuracy and consistency. Even testing your results against a few different make cronos wouldn't be a bad idea. Ive heard from most manufacturers you can expect about a 3% margin of error between them. My personal experience with the 3 that I have owned was that they were almost exactly the same. Only 1 showed 1fps slower that the other two. Not familiar with your brand used in the vid.
> 
> To your above post (up 3)
> Like I said earlier, Every day in this business is swimming with sharks, and sometimes the best thing you can say is what you dont. People simply wont be nearly as respectful to you from behind a keyboard and computer screen. Its unfortunate, but it seems to be the trend these days.
> Maybe in the future I would just let Arvid do his own tests and make his own claims.
> 
> Good day


I do thank you for your advice. The only problem I have is That Arvid is my Friend and His bow is the best recurve I have ever shot. 
When I posted the video I did this on my own with no communication from Arvid. 
This is Archery Talk and I wanted to share info on what I had experienced.
It is just that simple!

What others read into my actions is just that. conjecture.

Seems a few here on this forum look for the worst in others and see it even when it is not there.
I wonder if hard data will satisfy them?

Its kind of like watching the news. Something happens and BBC, CNN, Fox etc. all cover the event, and if you watch more than one news supplier you will see radical reports on the same event. How do you determine the truth?

FOX was sued for lying about news events, and the suit went to the supreme court.
Guess what the supreme court said. Yes they were lying !! but there is no law against it!!!!
Go figure?????
Not everyone that is in the archery business is a crook!
Some Are! But you find good and bad in all walks of life.


----------



## Aronnax

draw force curve


----------



## turbonockguy

I had some free time today so I made up 28 inch arrows at the different grain weights.
When I do the test shots I will do them with the 30 inch arrow. and also with the 28.Inch arrow.


----------



## Cold Weather

David Alford said:


> Herb Mullaney's report showed 207 fps with 540 g arrow and I assume 30" draw. That was a long time ago. Are the new limbs 18 fps faster? I suspect they may be; they are significantly lighter and this is generations of limbs later.


I really can't see how the Black Swan bows are any faster than other offerings. Something to me is not right with the claimed Mullaney report. I am just not buying it. I remember a Mullaney report on the 21 century longbow so I bought one. And that bow is not as fast as my Palmer . its not even as fast though 5 lbs heavier draw weight same arrow as my Wes Wallace Mentor. So I am suspect of Mullaney reports. Black Swans reputation is terrible. I honestly thought they were out of business. Arvid needs to stop making false claims on his crazy and ugly bow designs


----------



## nmlongbow

I agree on the terrible reputation of the Black Swan bows and neither Mr Alford or turbonock are doing anything to help that reputation. Groves recurves were known to be fast and their bows tested to 211 fps with a 540 grain arrow and [email protected] draw. This was in the 70's with a glass bow and Dacron string.

Arvid's youtube video of the 470 grain arrow and 191 fps at 10 gpp is also bogus. Even you believe the arrow weight and chrono reading it's clear that he pulls nearly 2" past that draw check flag.


----------



## David Alford

nmlongbow said:


> I agree on the terrible reputation of the Black Swan bows and neither Mr Alford or turbonock are doing anything to help that reputation. Groves recurves were known to be fast and their bows tested to 211 fps with a 540 grain arrow and [email protected] draw. This was in the 70's with a glass bow and Dacron string.
> 
> Arvid's youtube video of the 470 grain arrow and 191 fps at 10 gpp is also bogus. Even you believe the arrow weight and chrono reading it's clear that he pulls nearly 2" past that draw check flag.


It does sorta' look like the tip is pulled past the draw check flag. However, I attribute that to the angle of the camera. Besides the angle consideration, the argument against your claim is simple. If Arvid wanted to cheat he would simply have used a longer arrow, no one would know. Or, he could have just used a cooked chronograph. Or he could have used a 55# bow or even a 70# bow and just written 47#s on it. There are all kinds of ways to cheat. The least likely is that he would film the arrow being overdrawn, true? So, I'll take the principle of Occam's razor that the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one. Namely the test was performed exactly as Arvid described it.

As far as the "terrible reputation of Black Swan bows", most bowyers who have have been in business for years and who have had a lot of customers are going to have at least a dozen or more people with physical complaints about riser cracks, limb cracks, breakages, and so forth. 
These issues may not be the fault of the bowyer. They may be a result of a bad batch of glue. The may be related to a short bow that the bowyer specifically warned against using with long draws. The may even be the result of the owner mistreating the bow, such as leaving it in a hot car and then when the limb delaminates asking for a refund. 

What I'm saying is that every bowyer out there has a percentage of happy customers vs. unhappy customers. I have had issues with some of the most respected names in traditional archery. For example, ordering a set of 70# limbs and getting 80# limbs. I have had similar problems with custom guitars. Last year I ordered a famous flamenco guitar costing a lot of money. I found it to be so-so in performance and within a week the back cracked...hey stuff happens. Arizona does have a dry climate. But I didn't make the conclusion that the luthier was terrible, etc. And I wouldn't have allowed another person to go online repeating my misfortune and trying to ruin that Luthier's reputation based on MY experience. These products are handmade and we don't have an exact science here. 

Groves bows were mentioned above. I have owned Groves bows since the 1970's. I had issues with Groves bows in several areas including quality issues. IMO, there were great Groves bows and not so great Groves bows. One bow I ordered I prepaid for and never got the bow. The company took my money and as I was a college student at the time I didn't have the time or means to seek legal remedy. I could have concluded that Harold Groves was a crook and gone around blasting his name and doing my best to ruin his reputation.

Years later, I happened to be going thru Albuquerque and decided to pay Mr. Groves a personal visit! I had a pretty big chip on my shoulder, but I found Harold to be very friendly. He explained to me at the time I ordered the bow he was being ripped off by his own manager in things such as happened to me and that it ended up ruining his business. Groves Archery at this period went from being one of the largest archery companies to bankruptcy. Harold had to shut down his large scale operation at the time. When I met him in person he was working by himself in a very small shop in a poor district of Albuquerque. I found Harold to be very likeable and honest in my opinion. He tried to make amends with me by giving me a recent bow at a large discount and then custom modified the metal riser to my specifications on the spot. I left with an entirely different impression of Harold Groves.

The point of all this is to be careful in trying to ruin a man's reputation. Call me old school, but I don't understand all the meanness I see in these and other threads. I can truly say that if you guys met Arvid in person, you very likely would be very sorry for the way you have talked about him here. Here is a man in his elder years who has a life time of archery behind him, from design work for other companies to the very highest levels of tournament achievement. I know Arvid has given away bows to children and others he felt deserving. Anyway that is my opinion but it is is based on knowing the product first hand as well as the man over a period of years. 

As far as the objectivity of the chrono tests, I view almost all bowyer's claims with some skepticism myself. But I do think the odds are pretty high that Arvid just walked out into his backyard and shot that bow exactly as he described in the video.


----------



## David Alford

I will add MY opinion about the speed of Groves bows vs. Black Swan. Keep in mind I have owned both for years. I could get my Groves bows to shoot at phenomenal speeds using the overdraw. By that I mean I could shoot very light weight aluminium arrows because I could overcome the spine issue via using very short arrows. Using a higher poundage bow, the Groves would split those soda straws out there with blinding fast speed. However in comparing a regular length arrow in around 8-10 gpp, my guess is the Black Swan would be considerably faster. I did have a Ballistik recurve by John Fazio and I thought that bow was probably 15 fps faster than the Groves, although that is a guess. I would also hazard a guess as to say the recent Black Swan limbs are as fast or faster than the Ballistik.

The irony in all of this talk about speed is that it really is not the main issue I look at in selecting a bow. But that's the topic I guess we have here, for better or worse. Accuracy is number one for me, just sayin'...


----------



## David Alford

Cold Weather said:


> I really can't see how the Black Swan bows are any faster than other offerings. Something to me is not right with the claimed Mullaney report. I am just not buying it. I remember a Mullaney report on the 21 century longbow so I bought one. And that bow is not as fast as my Palmer . its not even as fast though 5 lbs heavier draw weight same arrow as my Wes Wallace Mentor. So I am suspect of Mullaney reports. Black Swans reputation is terrible. I honestly thought they were out of business. Arvid needs to stop making false claims on his crazy and ugly bow designs


Well, the reason the Black Swan could be faster than other offerings is that the limbs are lighter and don't use fiberglass. Fiberglass is heavy. I also owned a 21st century longbow for the same reason you gave and had a bit of a disappointment as well. But I know with both bows and guitars there can be a significant performance difference from one bow to another with varying woods. I think the odds are Herb Mullaney conducted his tests professionally and honestly. Only one bow achieved the highest speed and dynamic efficiency. That was Black Swan's. What about all the other bows he tested, why didn't he fudge their data and rank them higher?

Many people like the modern look of his bow. Some people love Howard Hill style longbows for they way they shoot and their appearance. My opinion is that have a ton more shock and are a lot slower than a modern design. I think we should be glad we have all these choices. It's the same with guitars, cars, clothes, computers, houses, people...I've seen Mac vs. Windows debates go on and on and on. You have to wonder why they hate each other. Be glad for the choice.


----------



## Cold Weather

A bow claimed 60 lbs 30 inch draw 540 gr arrow delivers 60 lb KE. I recall some of the other tests that era. PSE Mach Flite 4 213 fps. Oneida SE 600 227 fps. So Arvid is claiming he has developed a recurve that rivals older compounds lol. This nonsense is what gives BS their bad reputation. Lies. And lies combined with ugly bows and questionable workmanship. Granted I don't know Arvid personally but the BS reputation good grief.


----------



## Sanford

David Alford said:


> Well, the reason the Black Swan could be faster than other offerings is that the limbs are lighter and don't use fiberglass.


No. The materials are the materials, and even with the most advanced out there, newest, latest, greatest, the benefits are on the order of slight percentages over glass and wood. The newer materials, any of them, are lighter, some bit faster, and have better stability uses if laid up right. Anyone who knows recurve bows well enough knows this. 

If you want to hit anywhere near the speeds being stated, you have to make radical design changes, and that's where newer materials come to play. You need cams and wheels or you need radical bends in the limbs. The latter is where newer materials can let a bowyer do things to limbs wood and glass won't. 

It's total foolishness to tout up a standard framed recurve and claim some miracle material makes it act like the former, radical design compounds and extreme-curve recurves. The fact that folks are willing to sell out their integrity over this issue is as puzzling as someone bringing such claim to market as a bowyer.

This kind of stuff is fun and games in the industry, I guess, but over recent years, it seems that the lack of seeing Black Swan bows on the range has been replaced with them being the butt of jokes on the Internet because of such marketing nonsense.


----------



## Aronnax

Sanford said:


> No. The materials are the materials, and even with the most advanced out there, newest, latest, greatest, the benefits are on the order of slight percentages over glass and wood. The newer materials, any of them, are lighter, some bit faster, and have better stability uses if laid up right. Anyone who knows recurve bows well enough knows this.
> 
> If you want to hit anywhere near the speeds being stated, you have to make radical design changes, and that's where newer materials come to play. You need cams and wheels or you need radical bends in the limbs. The latter is where newer materials can let a bowyer do things to limbs wood and glass won't.
> 
> It's total foolishness to tout up a standard framed recurve and claim some miracle material makes it act like the former, radical design compounds and extreme-curve recurves. The fact that folks are willing to sell out their integrity over this issue is as puzzling as someone bringing such claim to market as a bowyer.
> 
> This kind of stuff is fun and games in the industry, I guess, but over recent years, it seems that the lack of seeing Black Swan bows on the range has been replaced with them being the butt of jokes on the Internet because of such marketing nonsense.


For example- assume a 45lb bow stores 40ke in the limbs, and we are shooting 9gpp arrows:
80% efficiency = 189fps
85% efficiency = 195fps
90% efficiency = 200fps
95% efficiency = 206fps
100% efficiency = 211fps

The only way to go faster is like Sanford says, store more energy by wheels or radical curves in the limbs.

The Border limbs store upwards of 1.2ft-pd per lb-df, so a 45lb bow may store around 54ke (actual numbers may differ from my example). Even at 80% efficiency, which is on par with a lot of bows- would be in the 220fps range.

For those of you that don't know:
ke = ( grains * velocity^2 ) / 450800
or
velocity = sqrt( ke * 450800 / grains )

Dynamic efficiency = arrow energy / limb stored energy

Calculating limb stored energy isn't quite as simple as the above basic algebra, and requires a detailed *DRAW FORCE CURVE*. I'm beginning to believe it is being intentionally withheld.

BM


----------



## grantmac

On the internet most bowyers have a small cadre of loyal fans, then a vast majority of people who bought them and like them, then a few who had problems but the bowyer took care of them and then perhaps 1 or 2 vocal critics who just couldn't be satisfied.

Arvid has one or two absolutely rabid fans (shills) who go from thread to thread promoting his bows as the best, then a number of people who have clearly been ripped off and then a vast majority who state they wouldn't touch his stuff with a 10 foot pole. Yet clearly he is still somehow in business.

It's my opinion that he derives the vast majority of his sales from people who don't research his bows on the internet because quite frankly why anyone would roll the dice on getting a functioning one with his well documented reputation is astounding. Clearly they must get their information from print media which is unfortunately very much for hire.

-Grant


----------



## Sanford

Aronnax, correct! You have a ratio of deformation energy that's stored to mass, and there's no limb material out there that can make it's own energy to add what you are pulling. So, even if the limbs weighed nothing, nada, were totally weightless, they are not going to make their own added energy to exceed the limitation.

So, you need a different point of attack in build for more speed - mechanical advantage. 

Here, recurves move off linear curve by the simple fact the bow goes from short string to long string, and then from long string to short string on return. The goal for performance here is not so much making a radical design, as that's centuries old, it's about using modern materials to make that radical design as stable as the bow's more stable counterpart bow.

Somehow, someone figured the "new space age" material claims could be passed off as a cheap substitute for real change in mechanical advantages. Hence, we can't and won't ever get a chrono to back the claims unless it too is fraud. It has to be.

No, Virginia, there is really is no Santa Clause!


----------



## Attack

YAMAHA had carbon ceramic limbs in the 80s.


----------



## Cold Weather

Aronnax said:


> For example- assume a 45lb bow stores 40ke in the limbs, and we are shooting 9gpp arrows:
> 80% efficiency = 189fps
> 85% efficiency = 195fps
> 90% efficiency = 200fps
> 95% efficiency = 206fps
> 100% efficiency = 211fps
> 
> The only way to go faster is like Sanford says, store more energy by wheels or radical curves in the limbs.
> 
> The Border limbs store upwards of 1.2ft-pd per lb-df, so a 45lb bow may store around 54ke (actual numbers may differ from my example). Even at 80% efficiency, which is on par with a lot of bows- would be in the 220fps range.
> 
> For those of you that don't know:
> ke = ( grains * velocity^2 ) / 450800
> or
> velocity = sqrt( ke * 450800 / grains )
> 
> Dynamic efficiency = arrow energy / limb stored energy
> 
> Calculating limb stored energy isn't quite as simple as the above basic algebra, and requires a detailed *DRAW FORCE CURVE*. I'm beginning to believe it is being intentionally withheld.
> 
> BM


KE is velocity times velocity times grain weight divided into 450240 . I know nothing of Border bow. I do know the Bob Lee Ultimate is a fast shooting bow claimed speed 198. fps. Anyone who has any experience with Bob Lee knows the man has integrity beyond reproach.


----------



## Aronnax

Cold Weather said:


> KE is velocity times velocity times grain weight divided into 450240 . I know nothing of Border bow. I do know the Bob Lee Ultimate is a fast shooting bow claimed speed 198. fps. Anyone who has any experience with Bob Lee knows the man has integrity beyond reproach.


450800 is the value for the lazy people. It's the difference between rounding 1g of acceleration to 32.2 vs 32.16.

Splitting hairs...

450800, or 225400 (for mo calcs) is easier for me to remember and easier to punch in my calculator...I'm just weird that way.

BM


----------



## David Alford

Sanford said:


> No. The materials are the materials, and even with the most advanced out there, newest, latest, greatest, the benefits are on the order of slight percentages over glass and wood. The newer materials, any of them, are lighter, some bit faster, and have better stability uses if laid up right. Anyone who knows recurve bows well enough knows this.
> 
> If you want to hit anywhere near the speeds being stated, you have to make radical design changes, and that's where newer materials come to play. You need cams and wheels or you need radical bends in the limbs. The latter is where newer materials can let a bowyer do things to limbs wood and glass won't.
> 
> It's total foolishness to tout up a standard framed recurve and claim some miracle material makes it act like the former, radical design compounds and extreme-curve recurves. The fact that folks are willing to sell out their integrity over this issue is as puzzling as someone bringing such claim to market as a bowyer.
> 
> This kind of stuff is fun and games in the industry, I guess, but over recent years, it seems that the lack of seeing Black Swan bows on the range has been replaced with them being the butt of jokes on the Internet because of such marketing nonsense.


The limbs are significantly lighter. I think you can pick up 10 fps over other known fast bows that use fiberglass and all wood cores. To narrow our argument down, we'd have to specify exactly what we are arguing about in terms of fps. I wouldn't argue that's Nick's first test in this thread is accurate, but I would argue that Arvid's test as just mentioned probably is. Do you think 191 fps is impossible for this or other top recurves @ 47# drawn to 28" 10 gap?


----------



## David Alford

Cold Weather said:


> KE is velocity times velocity times grain weight divided into 450240 . I know nothing of Border bow. I do know the Bob Lee Ultimate is a fast shooting bow claimed speed 198. fps. Anyone who has any experience with Bob Lee knows the man has integrity beyond reproach.


And I'm sure the Lees wouldn't do business with a dishonest fakir (as many have implied I am) for years. Just to let you know Jenni Lee and I have been business partners for years and I think I'm well regarded by Rob, etc.


----------



## David Alford

Attack said:


> YAMAHA had carbon ceramic limbs in the 80s.


And golf balls were made of the same materials decades ago as today. I wouldn't make the argument they are as good as the present ones. Ditto for carbon fly rods of yesteryear. To argue all carbon ceramic limbs are the same is highly questionable, if that is your intent.


----------



## David Alford

grantmac said:


> On the internet most bowyers have a small cadre of loyal fans, then a vast majority of people who bought them and like them, then a few who had problems but the bowyer took care of them and then perhaps 1 or 2 vocal critics who just couldn't be satisfied.
> 
> Arvid has one or two absolutely rabid fans (shills) who go from thread to thread promoting his bows as the best, then a number of people who have clearly been ripped off and then a vast majority who state they wouldn't touch his stuff with a 10 foot pole. Yet clearly he is still somehow in business.
> 
> It's my opinion that he derives the vast majority of his sales from people who don't research his bows on the internet because quite frankly why anyone would roll the dice on getting a functioning one with his well documented reputation is astounding. Clearly they must get their information from print media which is unfortunately very much for hire.
> 
> -Grant


I personally know of other highly satisfied Black Swan owners and there are others on YouTube, that can have gone out of their way to say in their opinion they like this bow more than any other. You are also recklessly guessing what the percentages of satisfied vs. unsatisfied are and you with Black Swan vs. other companies. You and others here have attempted to destroy a good man's reputation based on what a few other people have said vs. your own business dealings. I can hardly contain my contempt at this type of irresponsibility.


----------



## Attack

No, I was just saying it isn't new. New to BS? Maybe... But a new idea? No.


----------



## David Alford

"...it seems that the lack of seeing Black Swan bows on the range"....What type of argument is this? The bows are primarily short to medium hunting bows that happen to be fast, smooth and accurate. I wouldn't expect them to be the preferred choice for tournament archery. More important, Black Swan Archery is a one man business with a limited output. You might as well argue that my Tom Blackshear guitar can't be that good because there are very few Blackshear guitars being used in guitar concerts.

I'm about to make a little expedition in a few days but I'd like to just add this. One of the reasons I've answered or tried to answered so many of the criticisms here is because I'm a curious person and I wanted to probe this type of negativity and see what motivates it. Yes, it is a bit fascinating to see the toxic zeal some archers have at tearing town other archers or archery manufacturers specifically when they have not been hurt one iota themselves by any business transactions. That this includes SPONSORS OF THIS SITE YOU ENJOY is pretty extreme. Like gnawing at your own foot, IMO. More than one person owns TurboNocks an apology, IMO.

No surprise I guess that many manufacturers tend to stay clear of posting on Archery Talk and other archery forums that allow such negativity. Those that do, usually just drop by to make a brief announcement every now and then and then get out. You can't teach people to nicer to each other, that was someone's job.


----------



## David Alford

Attack said:


> No, I was just saying it isn't new. New to BS? Maybe... But a new idea? No.


The carbon being used in the new limbs resulted from a chance meeting Arvid had on an commercial airline flight with a representative of a company that just happened to be using a little known type of carbon in an unrelated business. I'm certainly not a materials expert, but it seems reasonable that not all carbon and not all carbon limbs have the same performance.


----------



## Attack

Do you just like to hear yourself talk? Why do you bring up all these other things(I'm great because stories). Just wondering?


----------



## David Alford

"You can't teach people to nicer to each other, that was someone's job." Say it better, You can't teach people to be nicer to each other in a thread. That was someone else's job long before they came here ...


----------



## David Alford

Attack said:


> Do you just like to hear yourself talk? Why do you bring up all these other things(I'm great because stories). Just wondering?


Do you like to hear yourself attack? Why do you bring up all these things (I'm great because I attack). Just wondering?


----------



## Sanford

David Alford said:


> The carbon being used in the new limbs resulted from a chance meeting Arvid had on an commercial airline flight with a representative of a company that just happened to be using a little known type of carbon in an unrelated business. I'm certainly not a materials expert, but it seems reasonable that not all carbon and not all carbon limbs have the same performance.


Heck, Arvid should have shared with him his magic chart that makes recurves go 300 fps. The two of them could be millionaires by now! If I thought you were serious or that you even believed that mess of a tale, it would be worth some pages here. Your hooks are rusty man. 

And yes, you see all kinds of trad bows on the range, lots of bowyers represented, some pretty obscure, too, especially all trad shoots. 

I guess this can go till Black Swan does another chart on page hits his website gets v. sales generated to determine if negative advertising is all it's cracked up to be. I can type. I'm game.


----------



## Sanford

David Alford said:


> No surprise I guess that many manufacturers tend to stay clear of posting on Archery Talk and other archery forums that allow such negativity. Those that do, usually just drop by to make a brief announcement every now and then and then get out. You can't teach people to nicer to each other, that was someone's job.


That's not the point of the place. It's to discuss archery topics and help folks out. Those manufacturers that do are polite enough to never mention their product in these sections. Though allowed, it's reflective of intent to sell over helping out others and reflects back on their company in poor taste. Worse is pimping for another manufacturer who is too cheap to pay his dues.


----------



## Attack

David Alford said:


> Do you like to hear yourself attack? Why do you bring up all these things (I'm great because I attack). Just wondering?


I was being honest. I was actually asking you... Not attacking. The only time I have ever attacked anyone(if you can even call it that) is when I told you I was not going to read your article because of the way you were talking to people I DO have respect for... People that didn't attack anyone on here either. If you can point out where I, or the others I was sticking up for actually attacked anyone, I will apologize. Maybe you feel they are attacks because you are emotionally invested in BS??? Do you belive calling people "Toxic" is not an attack?


----------



## David Alford

Sanford said:


> That's not the point of the place. It's to discuss archery topics and help folks out. Those manufacturers that do are polite enough to never mention their product in these sections. Though allowed, it's reflective of intent to sell over helping out others and reflects back on their company in poor taste. Worse is pimping for another manufacturer who is too cheap to pay his dues.


You're not getting away with that. This whole thread has been laced with people attacking manufacturers including a SPONSOR on this site, Turbonocks. Good grief man, you are not exactly making the case for anyone being a sponsor here. I hope Archery Talk pulls this entire thread at this point. The negativity in prior comments and certainly in yours cannot be reflecting well at all for additional sponsors. You are not an example of "archers helping archers" in the slightest but rather are an examples of "archers hurting archers".

I've said it countless times, does it ever sink in? Just stop attacking people and their companies personally. You can express your opinion on a chron test or a bow in a courteous manner.


----------



## Attack

David Alford said:


> You're not getting away with that. This whole thread has been laced with people attacking manufacturers including a SPONSOR on this site, Turbonocks. Good grief man, you are not exactly making the case for anyone being a sponsor here. I hope Archery Talk pulls this entire thread at this point. The negativity in prior comments and certainly in yours cannot be reflecting well at all for additional sponsors. You are not an example of "archers helping archers" in the slightest but rather are an examples of "archers hurting archers".
> 
> I've said it countless times, does it ever sink in? Just stop attacking people and their companies personally. You can express your opinion on a chron test or a bow in a courteous manner.


Again, he never mentioned any names. Just a little advise. You are taking all of this way too personal. You assume he is talking about Turboknocks and call it an attack, and then say everyone is negative. Don't take it all so personal. Go have an ice cold beer in the sun and think about nicer things.


----------



## ranchoarcher

Always the over reaction to a little criticism. Alford.


----------



## JParanee

Mr Alford 

I'll try again 

You have turned this into one mans crusade to right the evils of AT 

Here we have free speech and if people think they are getting scammed we as a collective group have the right to object 

There are plenty of other sites to go on that do not allow people to object to things or say what they want 

Maybe I should not of mentioned the poor customer service that Rusty received 

I had mentioned in the beginning that I had no bad words personally about BS or Turbo nocks but I do not agree with BS's return policy 

What bow company does not offer someone the right to return an item that they are not satisfied with 

I know if I buy an item from Trad Tech , Morrison , Border, Dryad ,Black Widow , Bob Lee ........ The list goes on and on and I for any reason am not pleased I can return the item 

In some cases there is a return shipping fee and maybe a restocking fee but they encourage you if you are not happy to return the item 

That alone makes Black Swan a company that stands out and not in a good way 

What if I bought a bow from Arvid after seeing one of his claims or Turbos claims of 250 + fps and when I got the bow it did not do near that speed 

That is false advertising 

I have nothing against Arvid and I am sure I would get along with him in person but I do not agree with his return policy and with bows the price that they are that fact alone would preclude me of being a customer 

You make me out to be a bad guy because I bring up an issue that happened to a very nice man that many of us on the forums have respect for 


You also say my videos are a blatant advertisement 

You could not be more correct 

I spend my money and I promote my friends 

Whether it be Border, Trad Tech or any company out there if I believe in the prouduct and I am happy with it I will speak well of it 

but I won't make claims that defy physics 

I think the problem here is that you came into a tumultuous thread that had made a lot of outlandish claims 

If Turbo would of pulled down his initial video and just moved on maybe getting help with his tests I do not believe this thread would have gone so south 

The faulty tests and going public with them only IMHO made his own tests of his own prouduct look suspect 

He has a history around here of making outlandish claims that gather a lot of attention and get long winded threads going about his product

I believe if a happy customer would of wrote a pleased review with out an outlandish claim the thread might of been received with well wishes etc. even thou most end badly do to these same reasons 


You are right he is a sponsor and he is welcome here but we don't have to agree with him on his testing and I did not need him to apologize for me when I wrote what started this all 

No Thanks  

If I would of known that that single comment would of jump started this thread again in such a big way BELIEVE me I would not have ever posted 

Again I have shot his nocks and I have no complaints other than I don't like gluing in my nocks and I like nocks that snap on my string a tad bit more. Plus they exibit in my experience slightly more serving wear 

But you are right I am sure if I meet him I would think him a swell fellow 

I get along with most 

Unlike you I know many on here and I've never been acused of being rude or nasty ......... Quite the contrary 

I do feel bad for Arvid in a way 

I wish him success .........

Like I said threads like this might garner attention.........but is it the kind of attention that he truly seeks 

Shock jocks get ratings and I guess any ratings are good ratings but maybe just maybe a better return policy and less unsubstantiated claims would serve Turbo and Arvid a bit better 

Like I said if I bought a bow from any number of Bowyers out there and for any reason if I choose to send it back ....... I could 

Earlier you mentioned that you are friends with Daniel Yononindo 

I count him as a friend also 

I take friendship very seriously so I will say I am sorry to you both 

I do not think I was wrong but I do not wish to be offensive 

So I will depart from this thread as gentlemanly as I can and wish you Turbo and Arvid the very best 

I hope this thread gets a million hits and I hope that Turbo and Arvid sell a million nocks and bows 

But regretfully none will be to me  

Hey ........... At least turbo offers a money back guarantee 

You guys have fun


----------



## David Alford

Jparanee,

Thanks for the semi apology, but it is more to Arvid/Blackswan and Nick/TurboNocks that the apology is owed. I am simply standing up for my friends and their products. Yes i have tremendous resolve when I think an injustice has been done and I believe many of these negative posts were meant to be harmful vs. fact finding. Very immature and at times a gang bullying mentality, in my opinion, which is why I called them toxic.

Let's look at some errors even in your semi apology, ok? I mean I appreciate the more positive tone of your post so I will expand on a few things.

You claim that Black Swan does not offer a return policy. That is completely false. Here is Black Swan's policy as stated very clearly and not hidden on their website: 

"All Black Swan Archery bows are covered under warranty against defects in materials and workmanship 
for one year from date of purchase to the original purchaser. 
Black Swan Archery will repair any part defective in material or workmanship during the warranty period without charge. If the purchaser discovers any defect, prompt notification of defect should be sent to Black Swan Archery Inc., 420 South Freeman Road, Tucson, Arizona 85748, USA. Black Swan Archery will respond with appropriate instructions or replacement parts, and may request that the bow be returned with transportation charges prepaid to the address given above.
SERVICING
For servicing of bows out of or not covered by warranty, call Black Swan Archery for a quote."

Let me add a few more comments so you will better understand Arvid's situation. Some years ago Arvid made a model that had high performance at short draws. He clearly stated at that time what the maximum draw lengths were and yet he had customers that he believed were way overdrawing that model and then asking for refunds when the limbs broke. He later eliminated that model from his lineup because the specific design parameters were being ignored. Most or all of his bows today (I believe) can tolerate very long draws. Secondly, I believe Black Swan does not offer a guarantee on bows bought thru a dealer. This may be where you thought he doesn't offer a guarantee. I believe other bowyers have similar policies. I think this is entirely understandable. Arvid has no control over how that bow was treated while in a dealers shop. Was it dry fired? How many times? Was it left in the sun or a hot corner? Etc. etc.

And right, the 5 yr. old limb fitting incident should not have been part of this topic. I trust his judgement more than a person I haven't met. I know he builds bows out of a labor of love more than trying to get rich. Judging from what I know of Arvid, he has absolutely no need to try to make $$$ or save $$$ by trying to scam someone. In my opinion he is a positive, friendly, generous, and very smart individual. But he seems to be highly principled and I doubt he suffers fools or the type of behaviour where someone goes online and starts raising a ruckus in order to get a limb adjustment taken care of. Let's put this incident to bed now as I do find even talking about it very poor form given that the age of the complaint, the one sidedness of the complaint, and the fact it was not a complaint of yours or anyone else in this thread. 

Yes, I know Daniel. We call each other brothers. We have hunted together. We hunted together at a ranch called "Brush Country Bowhunters". The rancher's name is Glenn Smitty. He shoots Black Swan bows. His daughter, a tournament archer, loves Black Swan bows. Smitty thinks it's the best bow out there and he sees a lot of trad bows because his ranch has had a lot of trad. archers and bowhunters there over the last 40 yrs.. Now if you want to see what his opinion of Arvid Danielson, who hunts there every year, or his opinion of Black Swan bows is, why don't you contact Glenn Smitty thru Brush Country bowhunting. I'll tell you what will happen if you do. You are going to find out this rancher who has seen all manner of bowhunters has the utmost respect for Arvid Daniels and Black Swan Bows. Heck, he even loves the STAR Method...

Daniel took a good look at Black Swan bows while we were there and liked them very much. In fact, I believe Daniel wanted to order one of Arvid's bows even though loves his Border bows. I'm not sure if he did or not, but I suggest the man's opinion counts more than those who have not even shot a Black Swan bow...


----------



## David Alford

"utmost respect for Arvid Daniels and Black Swan Bows." should read ...Arvid Danielson...


----------



## JParanee

That's not what I'm talking about..... I made no errors 

If I order a BS bow and for any reason I want to return the bow with in a certain time line minus shipping of course 

I can not correct ?

And since you mentioned it 

Please explain the STAR method


----------



## David Alford

JParanee said:


> That's not what I'm talking about..... I made no errors
> 
> If I order a BS bow and for any reason I want to return the bow with in a certain time line minus shipping of course
> 
> I can not correct ?
> 
> And since you mentioned it
> 
> Please explain the STAR method


You made no errors? I suggest you talk Glenn Smitty or our mutual friend Daniel and I believe you will see you and others here made the huge in the negative opinions regarding Arvid Danielson and Black Swan bows. As far as to returning a Black Swan bow for any reason, I don't know, but I doubt it. I doubt any bowyer is happy for a bow return on such a generic basis. Sure, many will do the return and act like they are happy they made the custom bow or custom draw weight, etc. just for you try out? Come on! They are NOT happy to do this. It is almost invariably a financial calculation. Bowyers with a large customer base puts know they can eventually resell the bow or minimise their loss whereas a small time bowyer very like will not be able to do so. It varies from bowyer to bowyer and there are many if not a majority of bowyers who don't state why the situation would be in their warranty which usually just covers defects or other problems. Yes, you can point to some bowyers who have a "no questions" asked policy, but don't for one second think they don't hate such returns. And I don't think highly of them myself. 

That said, I happen to offer an information product on line and we offer a lifetime no questions asked money back return policy. It's just that the numbers work out best that way for this product. And I really don't want any unhappy customers. But then, I don't have to put part of my life into making the product at this point in time because it is all digital. Heck, I even give away the product if I think people can't afford it...but again, it's ez for me to do as it is not handcrafted.

What is the STAR Method? Well, it's a method of shooting traditional bows that Matt and many others think is non-existent or bogus at best. Matt taunted me about it earlier in this thread. Funny, Glenn Smitty knows otherwise in fact he made a video testimonial for the method, the first time in his life he has ever done such a video I believe. Said this was the first one he was GLAD to make as others have asked for testimonials regarding their archery products. There are other archers, even here on Archery Talk that know the method is real and have switched over to it. And a growing number of people have seen me demonstrate the method up close and for days on end. And others have made video testimonials. These people range from well known traditional archers to people who never were able to shoot trad. bows well. But we digress...and for the STAR Method cynics and critics, please note I did not inject the STAR Method into this thread. I have only replied to JParanee's direct question. And that's all I want to say, otherwise I will be accused of b.s., guerrilla marketing, blah blah...


----------



## David Alford

"... made the huge in the negative opinions regarding..." should read "... made the huge error in their negative opinions regarding..."


----------



## David Alford

Well, I guess I'll be attacked for mentioning it in the preceding post, but that was a slight reference to Matt's earlier jab about the method. Sorry, I couldn't resist. It just came up when I started thinking about Smitty there at the ranch and all the fun we had laughing at the critics one arrow after another...


----------



## benofthehood

David Alford said:


> I'd bet not one person here would dare to act this way if we were all siting around the proverbial campfire.


Epic fail.

I have been away from archery internet stuff for a while ( now remember why after reading this). 

Come back and read this utter silliness...

Alford ... I'd bet there would be many who would have no problem discussing this face to face . Just doubt anyone from Camp Shill would turn up.


----------



## Bender

I haven't posted on this thread until now. However I have found some some relevant information. See this link:

http://giphy.com/gifs/train-wreck-7uGFLUZEqxO9O


----------



## David Alford

benofthehood said:


> Epic fail.
> 
> I have been away from archery internet stuff for a while ( now remember why after reading this).
> 
> Come back and read this utter silliness...
> 
> Alford ... I'd bet there would be many who would have no problem discussing this face to face . Just doubt anyone from Camp Shill would turn up.


Epic fail? Just use the modern version of campfire communication - the telephone.Let's see how many people call Arvid and debate with him the Chrono tests on his site and tell him his bows are garbage. Let's see how many here call Glenn Smitty and tell him despite his 40 yrs. of experience with all kinds of bows and having all types of hunters and archers on his ranch that Black Swan bows are terrible and that Arvid is a man who cannot be trusted. 

I have to say, I find it very funny indeed that JParnee's own friend thinks very well of Black Swan bows and wanted one even though he shoots one of the Worlds best recurves (Border Recurve) and that this friend is also my friend and a friend of the aforementioned rancher whose daughter also loves Black Swan bows.


----------



## turbonockguy

Bender said:


> I haven't posted on this thread until now. However I have found some some relevant information. See this link:
> 
> http://giphy.com/gifs/train-wreck-7uGFLUZEqxO9O


I believe that was an actual test to see what would happen . you have to sacrifice sometimes to get good data!!
You could make the connection that this thread is also a train wreck. but again I hope this "train wreck" will in the long run be a benefit to this forum.
Sure we have freedom of speech in this country. How we use or abuse our freedoms shows what we are!. I certainly have learned quite a bit about others..







Anyhow the snow is finally starting to go away. I found my target! It disappeared in early December. Hopefully a few more days and I will get the shooting done.
Sadly I doubt for some it will make much difference.

This is a PLUG for Third Hand Archery He makes the target skins that I use. It looks like it held up through the winter.


----------



## JParanee

My respect for Daniel has me off this thread and I rendered an apology 

That's respect for him.......nothing more ........ nothing less


----------



## David Alford

This is my last post on this thread as someone I know has passed away and I have a long trip to prepare for. I'm reminded how short life is and I don't have more time here to waste. If I were to stay and respond to posts some will say I'm still over reacting to criticism. If I didn't reply, others would claim their criticisms were valid. What I see here is a continued tendency to strike out and hurt others even though most if not all of the more vocal critics here have no personal experience with the bowyer or his product. 

I do think the moderator should pull the entire thread. Contradicting the guerrilla marketing theory, I have written the moderator asking for just that. Many of the posts are pathetic examples of archers hurting archers, with more enthusiasm for that than any desire for improved chrono test standards which have clearly taken a backseat as the thread topic.


----------



## grantmac

I cannot think of any bowyer OTHER than BS who would consider completely failing to meet the published performance expectations as anything BUT a defect. Let alone not even fitting on the bow the limbs were "designed" for.

Classic shill tactic is to claim their product is superior and customer service equal when there is clear evidence that it's nowhere close.

-Grant


----------



## Sanford

Grant, I believe where Black Swan got the capital idea to market based on performance numbers was from the compound guys. We see the IBO advertised speeds, and some (many) folks never get them. Kinda like "our bows are the fastest" type advertising, where the end result is unprovable - like the manufacturer can always claim the differences involved in shooter, test equipment, bow set up, etc., for any discrepancy.

Here, the specific claim is never challenged for refund mainly because the numbers are within "ballpark" and the speed is speed enough to not make a stink over false advertising claims.

Unlike that, we have the bowyer from Black Swan never even testing the speeds, showing anything close, just advertising some made up speed. Even that would be fine if he was "ballpark".

The whole 250-300 pfs stuff just flies in the face of archery as an insult to the intelligence of the community. Of course, don't point that out as being nonsense at the risk of being called a hater 

Still, it's a bald face lie hanging on someone's website as a trait of his product. If anyone owes an apology to anyone, Arvid should apologize for assuming the market was as dumb as his marketing tactic.


----------



## ranchoarcher

> What is the STAR Method? Well, it's a method of shooting traditional bows that Matt and many others think is non-existent or bogus at best. Matt taunted me about it earlier in this thread. Funny, Glenn Smitty knows otherwise in fact he made a video testimonial for the method, the first time in his life he has ever done such a video I believe. Said this was the first one he was GLAD to make as others have asked for testimonials regarding their archery products. There are other archers, even here on Archery Talk that know the method is real and have switched over to it. And a growing number of people have seen me demonstrate the method up close and for days on end. And others have made video testimonials. These people range from well known traditional archers to people who never were able to shoot trad. bows well. But we digress...and for the STAR Method cynics and critics, please note I did not inject the STAR Method into this thread. I have only replied to JParanee's direct question. And that's all I want to say, otherwise I will be accused of b.s., guerrilla marketing, blah blah...


 Let's see a link to one of these videos where the shooter says, "...star method..." Did a search and can't find a one. Anyone here use it or know what it is?


----------



## Yononindo

* as for being a new member here, I know, this is not the proper way of introducing myself …….*

I will do so later on …

It happened that I got involved here like a pawn in a game ...

*
David,*
as far as I´m concerned … this should have been handled via PM before going public … 

I do not like my words being twisted around to suit another persons opinion …

Indeed, we had us a good time hunting at Smitty´s

As for Black Swan bows … I think they are good bows … but just not my cup of tea …

and yes, I enjoyed shooting the BS bow …. but never ever said that I want one nor will I go and order one …. 

Sorry if it came across like this … 

Apology for that misunderstanding 


*Joe,*
no need to apologize nor being sorry


*David,*
one more thing here … 

you say: 

_" I have to say, I find it very funny indeed that JParanee's own friend thinks very well of Black Swan bows and wanted one even though he shoots one of the Worlds best recurves (Border Recurve) and that this friend is also my friend and a friend of the aforementioned rancher whose daughter also loves Black Swan bows."_



*I think there´s nothing funny about friends who like different things …

I am not into bikes … I know Joe likes em …. I love horses … does Joe like horses ???
*
*I do not care … but we are still friends even though our taste about different things vary …
*
*and that is what counts to me *


Thank you both for friendship


As for not being a native speaker I was trying my best here.


----------



## JINKSTER

Two words..."Daniel Rox!"

(more words) Daniel...your stock was already up there but...just went through the ceiling in my book. :thumbs_up

Now...DIE THREAD DIE!!!!!


----------



## Chris Hill

Good post Daniel, wish there was a like button or a thank you option.
Chris.


----------



## JParanee

Now you all know why I regard Daniel so highly


----------



## graysquirrel

Dont tou love it when statements and facts are twisted or taken out of context and then when pointed out you are calked toxic.

Way to go Daniel! We had figured it was that way.
Like 99.9 percent of Davids post. A little twisted, a little left out. All of it labeled BS. And tthat does not stand for Black Swan


----------



## Matt_Potter

ranchoarcher said:


> Let's see a link to one of these videos where the shooter says, "...star method..." Did a search and can't find a one. Anyone here use it or know what it is?


David Has been teasing the archery world with the Star Method since 2008 - do a search for "the star method" on the leather wall and draw your own conclusions

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The reputation far and wide is that stick bows are inferior hunting weapons. The basis for that is that is generally thought they are severely restricted in effective distance (partly true but that is an advantage in my opinion) and are difficult to shoot accurately.

But, what if a method existed for shooting stick bows nearly as accurately as a compound and that method was easily teachable and obtainable by the average enthusiast?

The Star Method I invented solves each and every problem of shooting stick bows to a considerable degree. In my opinion, there really will be no overwhelming reason to favor the compound unless you want to shoot at distances that are questionable in the opinion of many. What I'm implying is this: a potential revolution is forthcoming. "

"I have developed a system for shooting trad. bows almost as accurately as a compound up to 30 or 35 yds. It will be published in 2009. It solves EVERY problem that has stumped trad. bowhunters for the last 20,000 yrs. There really is no reason to shoot a compound anymore unless you want to shoot past 35 yds.

And no, it's not a rehash of instinctive, gap, split vision, apache style, etc. etc. methods we all know and have read about/used. It's new & the biggest advance in shooting traditional in the last 20,000 yrs. It is not covered in any book or video I know of.

OK, I guess I'm a little impartial....lol. Try and try, it was really very hard to do invent this...

My question is...what are the odds you would give for this to be real? "


----------



## David Alford

Daniel, you know I have respect for you and I'm sorry if you think I twisted your words. My honest recollection was that you told me you would like to have a Black Swan. So I apologise to you if you think I was twisting your words, but that was my honest recollection. It was based on my memory of us in Smitty's bow room with you looking (as I recall) Smitty's Black Swan bow and I indeed thought you said you would like to have the wave model. No? OK, that was my HONEST recollection. At any rate, as far as the critics here thinking this is a refutation of Black Swan, please read what Daniel has said in his post, "I think they are good bows." I know that our mutual rancher friend, Glenn Smitty agrees. Maybe I shouldn't mention what he thinks, either. There is no gain in this for me and I am not trying to use anyone, period. Rather I feel a huge wrong has been done to the bowyer, Arvid Danielson. Yes, it's not funny and of course I'm not laughing one bit about any of this. 

This whole mess is not so much the result of question speed test. Rather, the negative energy largely stems from critics who have never shot the bow in question or never met the bowyer and yet are determined to smear his reputation. I think it is borderline evil and runs entirely against the spirit of archery. At this current time, I'm sad at the death of a person I knew and it puts a lot of this into perspective. Life is short. Why create negativity in this gift of life and energy we have? I don't understand archers hurting archers, this type of vindictiveness, I really don't. 

Good hunting Daniel and to all who create positive energy.


----------



## David Alford

Matt, I wrote that a long time after solving a big problem that had been bothering me and I was in a very happy and overly expansive mood. In recent years I've apologised for being a perfectionist that didn't meet self imposed deadlines, but then I'm hardly the only writer that has a history of this. Plus, I had other promises I decide to meet because I had other partners in various projects and I decided to keep those obligations. These days, I more inclined to simply say I believe the method will help a percentage of of archers and bow hunters. There is no method and no bow that everyone will be happy with. What is best is choices.


----------



## David Alford

"Matt, I wrote that a long time after solving a big problem that had been bothering me and I was in a very happy and overly expansive mood." Should read...I wrote that a long time ago just after solving a big problem..." Yes, I was overly happy maybe.


----------



## David Alford

graysquirrel said:


> Dont tou love it when statements and facts are twisted or taken out of context and then when pointed out you are calked toxic.
> 
> Way to go Daniel! We had figured it was that way.
> Like 99.9 percent of Davids post. A little twisted, a little left out. All of it labeled BS. And tthat does not stand for Black Swan


Glad you are an expert on me. Silly me for trying so hard at the things you are so sure I have failed at. At least I tried...win, lose or draw.


----------



## David Alford

I also apologize to all for sticking up for Arvid who I know to be a good man. In some things I have unbending resolve. Like a faithful old dog, no quit in me. But this thread has become a mess when friends are unhappy with friends. Another reason why the internet fails in some things. Yes, we might all be in better mood around the ol' campfire. What a shame...


----------



## David Alford

grantmac said:


> I cannot think of any bowyer OTHER than BS who would consider completely failing to meet the published performance expectations as anything BUT a defect. Let alone not even fitting on the bow the limbs were "designed" for.
> 
> Classic shill tactic is to claim their product is superior and customer service equal when there is clear evidence that it's nowhere close.
> 
> -Grant


Since he made no claims here or advertising, if you wish to vilify him and call him a liar, why not pick up the phone or better yet, visit him. Or PM him as has been suggested we do to settle matters. You are betting what if you are wrong? Nothing of yours, isn't that right? Yet you easily gamble with another man's livelihood?


----------



## David Alford

As I have said elsewhere, there is a karmic law that negativity breeds negativity. People who hurt others will hurt themselves. Negativity does have power. It can travel around the world. Im currently in SE Asia and the negativity from many in this thread has spread all the way over here. Fortunately, positive energy is just as strong. There has always been this tug of war between positive and negative. Choose carefully which you embrace as your style and motivation because you will have an effect on others and the world.


----------



## turbonockguy

Well It is raining today. most of the snow is gone . so if it dries up I will do the chrono test.

I have found a source for the second chronograph test to either verify, or vilify my chronograph.
In about two weeks I am going to Lakota Archery in Xenia Ohio. They have a chronograph and we will repeat the test of the Black Swan on their chronograph.


----------



## graysquirrel

David Alford said:


> Glad you are an expert on me. Silly me for trying so hard at the things you are so sure I have failed at. At least I tried...win, lose or draw.


Actually David, the majority of us are pretty POSITIVE what you are made of, you have POSITIVELY reinforced it. YOU are totally responsible. No negativity there.


----------



## turbonockguy

Since this is a very important time to Christians around the world, I would like to share with you all my favorite prayer. From the Irish side of my ancestry.
May you all have a meaningful easter!!!


----------



## JINKSTER

turbonockguy said:


> Since this is a very important time to Christians around the world, I would like to share with you all my favorite prayer. From the Irish side of my ancestry.
> May you all have a meaningful easter!!!
> View attachment 2200886


wow...just "wow"....dude...you really need to stop as it seems you have a remarkable ability to give just about anything a bad name. 

I'll pray for you...and not that you'll twist your ankle or injure yourself in any way...and no..."joke prayers" are not okay...especially during the Resurrection Holidays...and super especially when said "Christian Joke" is being used to promote products and increase sales in a public forum....sad....I mean really sad.


----------



## graysquirrel

turbonockguy said:


> Since this is a very important time to Christians around the world, I would like to share with you all my favorite prayer. From the Irish side of my ancestry.
> May you all have a meaningful easter!!!
> View attachment 2200886


An apology with the statement I was duped, wrong, and will now shut up is appropriate , this is not, in fact it is very offensive


----------



## turbonockguy

JINKSTER said:


> wow...just "wow"....dude...you really need to stop as it seems you have a remarkable ability to give just about anything a bad name.
> 
> I'll pray for you...and not that you'll twist your ankle or injure yourself in any way...and no..."joke prayers" are not okay...especially during the Resurrection Holidays...and super especially when said "Christian Joke" is being used to promote products and increase sales in a public forum....sad....I mean really sad.


Sorry but you are the one who does not get it! You seem to look for the darkness in everything.
The resurrection finishes up as a time of joy! Lighthearted blessing has nothing to do with selling products.
If you truly believe what you posted. I pray for you.


----------



## graysquirrel

Then post the post in an appropriate setting, by itself, and not associated with the pile of garbage that is in this thread, YOU are the one that truly does not get it



turbonockguy said:


> Sorry but you are the one who does not get it! You seem to look for the darkness in everything.
> The resurrection finishes up as a time of joy! Lighthearted blessing has nothing to do with selling products.
> If you truly believe what you posted. I pray for you.


----------



## nmlongbow

David and turbo, you guys are not helping your credibility or your business with all of these posts. Everyone can see through all of outrageous claims and excuses. I wouldn't ever consider buying those expensive nocks and questionable black swan bows after reading this thread. All of this promotion is really backfiring.


----------



## turbonockguy

I wish you all a happy Easter no matter what your faith or your misinterpreted beliefs of my actions are.
Although saddened I will not let negativity get me down.

I leave you with this for now. It comes from the book of Matthew.

"Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you.'


----------



## graysquirrel

you would learn more by reading and meditating on Prov 14:8 

" the prudent understand where they are going, but fools deceive themselves"


----------



## turbonockguy

I guess you could turn this into a quote battle. But that would be really sad.
I am not going there. Have a nice Easter!!


----------



## deerbuster22

honestly I think this thread should be closed down because this has gone from a testing post to disagreements, to now a full blown argument over stupid crap. We are here to help build one another and bond as a brother hood of archers, however the only thing that is coming through now is complete hatred towards one another. We should all be ashamed of ourselves for letting this get so far out of hand. Also this post here alone is being heard and talked about all over the internet and it is making traditional archery and archers look like a bunch of babbling babies, grow a pair, if you dont like it move on.


----------



## David Alford

deerbuster22 said:


> honestly I think this thread should be closed down because this has gone from a testing post to disagreements, to now a full blown argument over stupid crap. We are here to help build one another and bond as a brother hood of archers, however the only thing that is coming through now is complete hatred towards one another. We should all be ashamed of ourselves for letting this get so far out of hand. Also this post here alone is being heard and talked about all over the internet and it is making traditional archery and archers look like a bunch of babbling babies, grow a pair, if you dont like it move on.


I agree entirely. It's apparently cost me my friendship with Daniel whereas if this conversation had been in person, I know that would not have happened. It's easy to have a selective memory and to type things in the heat of an argument that one wouldn't otherwise. I'm not perfect and I try to tell the truth although I make mistakes of judgment and memory. Can anyone say they haven't? Please step forward. I would like to meet such a perfect human being.

The larger issue is the overall negativity of this thread and the meanness I see here. Ive seen such levels of meanness in racism and religious hatred as we see around the world. I call it out when it's close at hand and I've called it out in this thread regarding the personal attacks and people hating people they have never met or had a business dealing with. It's regrettable more people haven't taken a stand against it in this thread! So deerbuster22 thanks for your comment and I second you. This thread should be pulled.


----------



## Cold Weather

David

If Black Swan wasn't making all their false outrageous claims and YOU and Turbonock weren't trying to defend them this thread wouldn't exist


----------



## David Alford

Black Swan has made no claims here. As far as Turbonocks, Nick is trying to do a more accurate test and he did not defend this first test, admitting the results were invalid and that he would try to do better. The majority of posts afterwards have been one personal attack after another, and have exhibited a level of meanness that has no place in archery.


----------



## David Alford

graysquirrel said:


> An apology with the statement I was duped, wrong, and will now shut up is appropriate , this is not, in fact it is very offensive


It wasn't on topic, but I'm in favour of religious jokes. Some like ISIS like to kill people because of religious cartoons. Others just think religion just should never be joked about, especially during Christmas. Let's not mess with that season most of all. Or taxed. Nope, no jokes about religion, and no taxes for them either! However, feel free to joke about UFOs and little green men all you want. It's funny and unbelievable.


----------



## Cold Weather

David Alford said:


> Black Swan has made no claims here. As far as Turbonocks, Nick is trying to do a more accurate test and he did not defend this first test, admitting the results were invalid and that he would try to do better. The majority of posts afterwards have been one personal attack after another, and have exhibited a level of meanness that has no place in archery.


We see his obvious false claims on his site. You argue somehow they are true. They're not. That you defend this Arvid as somehow honest when its clear he is not causes the friction.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

turbonockguy said:


> I Shoot one of Arvids Bows. I like it. Some of his shooters shoot my nocks. They like them. I do not get paid by Arvid and am not employed by him. We are Friends.
> When he sent me the new limbs I was in disbelief of the speeds.
> Arvid just sent me a flow chart he did ( based on the speeds I gave him) and got a 340 ibo with this.
> View attachment 2141161
> 
> 
> I am not trying to scam or defraud anyone. I have been using this chrono for years. I learned a long time ago that incandesant and flourescent lights do not work. However I have had no problems with Halogins. So in the shooting Today I am using a single 250 watt Halogen. If the weather warms up over the next few days I will do the same test in direct sunlight.
> 
> Sadly on this site when anything new comes up the nay sayers go banannas! Remember I am the turbonock Guy. I am used to negativity! And yet for some reason my nocks .work. All I am doing with this thread is posting something that seemed quite amazing to me.
> Hopefully by this evening I will have everything re shot again. and you all can argue some more.
> Archers helping Archers????


What this? A claim. By who?
Oops I did it again.
Dan


----------



## David Alford

Cold Weather said:


> We see his obvious false claims on his site. You argue somehow they are true. They're not. That you defend this Arvid as somehow honest when its clear he is not causes the friction.


Actually, what I'm in favour of is accurate testing and let the chips fall where they may as far as fps. I don't know that he has fudged the tests and neither do you. I wouldn't have a problem if you or someone else said they were doubtful. Not at all.

What I don't like is this jumping to conclusions about others and especially trying to destroy a person's business without being 100% sure that 1) the tests were false and 2) that they were intentionally falsified. Maybe he's honest but his chronograph is off. Maybe the IBO test was calculated but the other model by model tests were done by a 3rd party. I don't know and neither do you. If you're so concerned why not PM Black Swan as others have suggested we do BEFORE YOU CONVICT HIM.

And hey, Hoyt claims they make the World's best bow. Really? Are you not enraged? I happen to disagree with such a HUGE claim, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Is this a false claim or a true one? Anyway, I owned the world's fastest bow. It was the Groves Spitfire. Um sorry. I mean Jack Howard's Jet. Um wait, I heard it was now a PSE compound, sorry. Personally, I don't really care who has the fastest bow but I do think Groves and Howard, probably had some basis for their claims and I am willing to give Black Swan the benefit of the doubt to some of their claims as well. As many are, I'm suspicious of advertising, but I suspect there is an explanation and not necessarily a deliberate lie.


----------



## David Alford

graysquirrel said:


> Actually David, the majority of us are pretty POSITIVE what you are made of, you have POSITIVELY reinforced it. YOU are totally responsible. No negativity there.


I'm stuck in a motel room at the moment and so am replying to all. 

My reply to you graysquirrel is that I try to be positive and I try to be truthful. I'm quite taken back when I found I've made an error of memory, but I admitted it was an error and apologised, that's all I can do. Offline, I avoid debate and seek common ground. I can't imagine arguing even with you because there are arrows to shoot and archery is about having fun.


----------



## David Alford

Actually i have a terrible memory, so I shouldn't be surprised. And like many, I probably have a selective memory. I've just read about this and I think it is true. Arguably more common in happy people. A very interesting phenomenon.


----------



## David Alford

Recent events have really made me think of how short our lives are so I have to move on from this long "debate". Let's see if I can stick to that going forward. I'm sure there will be other comments and criticisms I would be temped to reply to, but ultimately the more one defends, the more offence and the higher chance for both sides to offend. Most people are interested in defending or proving their initial positions, anyway. 

I hope Nick does a better chrono test, I think it's clear he honestly desires to do that. However, it comes out, let the chips fall where they may...but it still won't be definitive nor will it satisfy everyone. And so I expect even more of the same and I can't justify more time here, myself esp. since fps is not the ultimate bow quality for me.

Relevant discussion about our biases here, some of which I know I'm guilty of myself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance 

David


----------



## Arron

:BangHead::spam1::spam4::frusty::rip::blah::closed_2::lock1::deadhorse


----------



## Cold Weather

Didn't David say he was done with this thread earlier. Leaving for a funeral. Wouldn't post?


----------



## Hank

I have talked with Arvid personally on the phone - very knowledgable person on shooting and archery in general. Answered every question I had even though I wasn't even buying a bow. I do own one of his older ones, very hard hitting accurate bow. Did you know Arvid was the alternate on the 1980 Olympic Archery Team? Finished right behind Mckinney and Pace, without a clicker, a dead release and using a glove, not a tab. He is the real deal. These current world barebow champions are probably lucky he hasn't shown up to shoot.

It is obvious the original poster is learning about the chrono on the fly here. Give him some time and a little consideration, he doesn't seem to be trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes.


----------



## graysquirrel

Hank said:


> I have talked with Arvid personally on the phone - very knowledgable person on shooting and archery in general. Answered every question I had even though I wasn't even buying a bow. I do own one of his older ones, very hard hitting accurate bow. Did you know Arvid was the alternate on the 1980 Olympic Archery Team? Finished right behind Mckinney and Pace, without a clicker, a dead release and using a glove, not a tab. He is the real deal. These current world barebow champions are probably lucky he hasn't shown up to shoot
> 
> It is obvious the original poster is learning about the chrono on the fly here. Give him some time and a little consideration, he doesn't seem to be trying to pull the wool over anyone's eyes.



Now thats funny, also a joke on the last part. The 1980 Olympic archery team never competed in the Olympics due to the US boycotting the Olympics. However Arvid did make alternate. Which is a big deal.

As for the barebow archers being lucky,,,,,,,that is funny, because they have absolutely nothing to be concerned about


----------



## ranchoarcher

It's unnecessary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jha2-90Jx8 Speed tests done

45lb bow shooting 405 grain arrows (9 gpp) came in at 186 fps.


----------



## turbonockguy

ranchoarcher said:


> It's unnecessary. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jha2-90Jx8 Speed tests done
> 
> 45lb bow shooting 405 grain arrows (9 gpp) came in at 186 fps.


thanks for posting that video.
That will be a good comparison for my test shots.
The Hybrid and the recurve have tested previously at the same speeds.
The difference will be that I have a different composition limb than what was used in the video.
That one has the original carbon mat composition. 
The carbon used on the limbs I have is not a mat. and so we will see if the newer material is more efficient.
Thanks Again!!!!!!!


----------



## turbonockguy

I just checked in the shop and I have a 28 inch shaft that I just set up to 405 grains. My bow at 28 inches is the same poundage as the one in the video so I can compare the performance differences between the older limbs and the new limbs.


----------



## Cold Weather

Those Black Swans are butt ugly bows. A metal riser on a longbow eesh..


----------



## turbonockguy

Cold Weather said:


> Those Black Swans are butt ugly bows. A metal riser on a longbow eesh..


Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I like how it looks , you do not. Not worth fighting about. 

Anyhow . my yard is finally snow clear enough to get the shooting machine outside. The weather forcast looks like Monday will be good for the test shooting finally.

Also I scrounged up an arrow that I made 9 grains at 30 inches . so now I will be able to perhaps satisfy most.

at 30 inches The bow develops 49 lbs. I have a 10 grain arrow- 490 grains. a 9 grain arrow- 441 grains and a 5 grain arrow- 245 grains

at 28 inches the bow develops 45 lbs. I have a 10 grain arrow- 450 grains a 9 grain arrow- 405 grains and a 5 grain arrow- 225 grains

As I stated before after I do my outdoor testing . hopefully monday. I will also take the bow and arrows and shooting machine to Lakota Archery and repeat the test 
with their factory chronograph.


----------



## Attack

Sounds like you have the testing down quite a bit better turbo, I am curious to see how it turns out.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau

TNG,

I have found that I get the most consistent results when I use the optional IR light bars with my chrono. I use the light bars even when doing measurements outside, and always if I am making measurements inside.


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Plus I might add a wall outlet power supply. Shoot first a known test setup to establish a baseline. If it's video show the bow weight scale, arrow weight scaled and baseline shots.
Dan


----------



## turbonockguy

DDSHOOTER said:


> Plus I might add a wall outlet power supply. Shoot first a known test setup to establish a baseline. If it's video show the bow weight scale, arrow weight scaled and baseline shots.
> Dan


I want to thank you and Hank for the advice. 


I will do the shots outside in the sunlight, then I will go inside and use the indoor lighting. I will be doing video showing the arrow weights and the bow scale.
I am also going to show the bow scale lifting a known weight to verify its accuracy.

Then to back all that up I will re do the test at the Lakota factory.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------







This is a telephoto shot of the tree line of my back yard yesterday. Ah yes Spring has sprung. I actually got up the gumption to move my archery target to the tree line for the chrono tests.







This is my backyard this morning with 3 inches of lovely spring snow. you can see the target. the turkeys were about 10 yds to the left of the target yesterday.
This should be melted by monday.


----------



## Hank

Where did i say anything about him shooting in the Olympics? 

Have you read that article on Arvid in the latest Traditional Bowhunter Magazine? Quite interesting.


----------



## turbonockguy

Just finished putting the video together and uploaded to youtube. It is processing now. I will post as soon as it is finished.
Here are the numbers from the video.
Black Swan Bow.
Brace Height = 8 inches.
49 lbs @ 30 inches.
45 lbs @ 28 inches.

30 inch speeds.
490 grain arrow 10gpp= 194 fps
441 grain arrow 9 gpp = 202fps
245 grain arrow 5 gpp= 253 fps

28 inch speeds
450 grain arrow 10 gpp= 183fps
404 grain arrow 9 gpp= 190 fps
225 grain arrow 5 gpp = 242 fps


----------



## Attack

Interesting. How did the bow handle shooting those super light arrows? Was it accurate? Loud? What gpp would BS waranty the bow down to?


----------



## turbonockguy

Attack said:


> Interesting. How did the bow handle shooting those super light arrows? Was it accurate? Loud? What gpp would BS waranty the bow down to?


I had it in a shooting machine. so I did not get a feel but it was a little noisy as you will hear on the video.
as to accuracy I was shooting only about 10feet . 

Arvid advised me to not go under six grains. So I took a chance. I examined the bow and no visible issues.
I am going to do some hand shooting with arrows around six grain but not 5 grain.
I figured if i did not do 5 grain someone on this thread would have a hissy fit.

I did discuss this with Arvid. He is designing some competition flight bows and is using similar limbs .with 5 grain arrows and the test shots show the limbs are holding up.


----------



## Sanford

Seems like this one can be billed as his slowest advertised bow! What's "improved" if its IBO is 50fps slower than his older stuff


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> Seems like this one can be billed as his slowest advertised bow! What's "improved" if its IBO is 50fps slower than his older stuff


Wow ! its starting even before the video is up!


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> Wow ! its starting even before the video is up!


What's starting? Arvid tested at 300 pfs IBO - fingershot - video posted here. Months later and many, many pages later, you find 10 feet of room in your yard to do your test. You are 50 fps slower - with a shooting machine. One or both of you has a bad chrono or needs to learn to use one.

As to my comment. His slowest advertised bow is his standard longbow at 205 pfs AMO. You are showing 202 pfs AMO with new and improved high performance recurve. That's what that was about - what's improved?


----------



## patrick2cents

turbonockguy said:


> Just finished putting the video together and uploaded to youtube. It is processing now. I will post as soon as it is finished.
> Here are the numbers from the video.
> Black Swan Bow.
> Brace Height = 8 inches.
> 49 lbs @ 30 inches.
> 45 lbs @ 28 inches.
> 
> 30 inch speeds.
> 490 grain arrow 10gpp= 194 fps
> 441 grain arrow 9 gpp = 202fps
> 245 grain arrow 5 gpp= 253 fps
> 
> 28 inch speeds
> 450 grain arrow 10 gpp= 183fps
> 404 grain arrow 9 gpp= 190 fps
> 225 grain arrow 5 gpp = 242 fps


Those sound reasonable. Thanks for the numbers and the test!


----------



## DDSHOOTER

Very standard reasonable [email protected] numbers to me. Hand shot with string silencer (like shown in the bow shop Video) will be a bit slower. Nick, thanks for showing. 
Dan


----------



## grantmac

Logical and very ordinary speeds for a bow using some carbon in it's construction with standard geometry. Definitely not performing on par with many all-carbon limbs which store more energy, especially considering how reflexed the riser is.

-Grant


----------



## turbonockguy

Here is the video.


----------



## JParanee

Fair test Nick 

Realistic numbers and I commend you on your persistence  

When I speed test limbs I measure the arrow to the back of the bow (meaning the part that faces away from me) but i know that It was requested that you do it this way and I believe your numbers


----------



## David Alford

Nick certainly did not try to maximize the chrono test results. Importantly, the bowyer has a recommended brace ht. of 7-8". So very fairly, he could have gotten another inch of power stroke by using a 7" brace ht. Additionally, if a "skinny string" wasn't used as many do, that cost another few fps. Most would also not use a brass nock. This test while very fair, arguably would have tested 10 fps faster by someone wanting to maximize results.

While Nick is going to even post another independent test, it's clear he has obviously tried to be fair and objective. He also comes across in the video as a very affable person. This is the person so many here were slamming? I think a LOT of people here who attacked Nick owe him an apology. Let's see how many do apologize.


----------



## GEREP

Thanks for sticking with this and posting the results Nick. 

In 15 years of visiting traditional archery sites, I don't think I've ever seen such a demand for specificity in performance testing, or a person willing to jump through the requisite hoops to provide it. You should be commended for your willingness to at least try to provide it. 

It's truly a shame that we don't hold all performance claims to the same standards. 

KPC


----------



## turbonockguy

JParanee said:


> Fair test Nick
> 
> Realistic numbers and I commend you on your persistence
> 
> When I speed test limbs I measure the arrow to the back of the bow (meaning the part that faces away from me) but i know that It was requested that you do it this way and I believe your numbers


Thanks. I could have made the bow shoot a little faster, but I was also doing this for myself. 
I am going to hand shoot my arrows
through the chrono. I only shoot 26 inches. which makes the bow 41 lbs and I think my arrows are around 300 grains

. this does not match any standardized specs but is what I shoot.

When I made the first post with the original video I am pretty sure I muttered I do not believe this!
pertaining to the speed of the chrono.
After all that has transpired on this thread I will only say. " I do not believe this" pertaining to how we treat our fellow man. 
Makes me sad.


----------



## BarneySlayer

Nick, while I don't believe I owe you any apologies, I do think I owe you the acknowledgment that you did come through 

It will be nice to see some secondary testing, and if possible draw force curves.

Question, and sorry if I missed it...

Is you draw length based on AMO/ATA standard (string to deepest part of grip, plus 1.75")?
Is the gpp based on measured draw weight at the specified draw length?


----------



## turbonockguy

BarneySlayer said:


> Nick, while I don't believe I owe you any apologies, I do think I owe you the acknowledgment that you did come through
> 
> It will be nice to see some secondary testing, and if possible draw force curves.
> 
> Question, and sorry if I missed it...
> 
> Is you draw length based on AMO/ATA standard (string to deepest part of grip, plus 1.75")?
> Is the gpp based on measured draw weight at the specified draw length?


I did the 30 inch arrows by setting the draw point to 28.5 inches to the index line right at the plunger.
some of the arrows may have been an inch or two longer than 30 inches to get the grain weight .
the 49 lb bow I used 490 grains, for 10 pp and so on.
the 28 inch arrow I drew 26.5 to the plunger and the 45 lb had a 450 grain for the 10gpp and so on for the other grain weights. I think that is a quarter inch off what you wanted.
I actually showed drawing the bow to the specified length with a bowscale. I may have been up to a quarter inch off on my drawing of the bow because my arms are not that long I shoot 26. My son videoed the draw and you can see the indexing lines on the video. also the arrows were all weighed on video.


I am not expecting or looking for apologies. I am hoping sportsmen (archers) will just treat each other like we are all part of the same family. 
I grew up in this sport. first tournament 1953. My memories of the sport from that time people did not seem to behave as they do now. 
I wonder how many more folks would participate in these forums if they were not concerned about being attacked by a small minority? 
Disagreements are fine, but nothing is gained with all the silliness that some feel they need to inject.
chit still means ****. and I think we can all use better language here. ( as you can see I typed in **** and it was automatically edited out yet chit gets through. )


----------



## turbonockguy

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2444860

This makes me sad. I just did a search and found this other thread. I think the link above should get you to it.
I have tried my very best to do this right. I found that some who posted
on this thread went and started another to try an stop this one and vent their opinions.
Sadly I did not find out about this thread or I would have at least had a chance to answer their allegations. 
That thread has been closed. I did not request that it should be closed! I did not know about it!
I would not have asked to have it closed. I prefer to confront issues personally and in a civil manner.
I do understand why the moderators closed the thread. 
Still makes me sad .
perhaps it is best this one is closed also.

The only reason I kept posting here was my hope that some folks would see and understand that our sport and we as fellow humans . need to figure a way to communicate without acting like immature children. It seems the other thread was opened for several there to spew more negativity without me being able to respond.
I wish I would have found the thread earlier. 
there were over 26.000 hits on this thread. I just wish more of you would have responded. whether it would have been positive or negative. If you say nothing, usually the negative prevails. 
Winston. Churchill had a quote from Shakespeare on his tomb. "The good deeds of men are oft interred with their bones "


----------



## graysquirrel

This thread should have been closed31 pages ago


----------



## turbonockguy

graysquirrel said:


> This thread should have been closed31 pages ago


Thanks for your input.


----------



## Sanford

If you add up the good-natured reputation of the folks on that thread, it's pretty evident that Turbonocks and Black Swan lost way more marketing capital than gained by this silliness in abusing posting privileges and wasting the time of good-natured folks in order to get face-time on the Net. What's sad is that it takes that to get the word out for a product.

Now, to get another thread bump, it takes a gossip turn on folks - even on those who didn't respond. That's sad!


----------



## kegan

My thread was closed because I personally asked the moderators to do so. It got hijacked by the same person who turned this one into a debacle.

It had nothing to do with you.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> If you add up the good-natured reputation of the folks on that thread, it's pretty evident that Turbonocks and Black Swan lost way more marketing capital than gained by this silliness in abusing posting privileges and wasting the time of good-natured folks in order to get face-time on the Net. What's sad is that it takes that to get the word out for a product.
> 
> Now, to get another thread bump, it takes a gossip turn on folks - even on those who didn't respond. That's sad!


That makes no sense . only your opinion. You required data of me . I would expect that from you also.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> That makes no sense . only your opinion. You required data of me . I would expect that from you also.


I didn't require anything of you. I knew there was no such thing as "solid carbon" material to begin with, which pretty much defined the outcome of this thread.


----------



## turbonockguy

Sanford said:


> I didn't require anything of you. I knew there was no such thing as "solid carbon" material to begin with, which pretty much defined the outcome of this thread.


The carbon used in the lamination was not a carbon matt like most layups. I think it could be described as a solid sheet.
The limb was not solid carbon but that sheet was used in the lamination rather than a woven mat.

again your comment ,your opinion.


----------



## Sanford

turbonockguy said:


> The carbon used in the lamination was not a carbon matt like most layups. I think it could be described as a solid sheet.
> The limb was not solid carbon but that sheet was used in the lamination rather than a woven mat.
> 
> again your comment ,your opinion.


Yes, it's unidirectional or biased "fibers" laid up in a solid matrix of epoxy. Nothing magic about it to make it any better than a bowyer using fiber mat and laying it up in a matrix of epoxy. Once bound, the fibers are still the fibers and the carrier is just weight. If he had discovered a magical carbon fiber that didn't need a carrier-bonding, then something might be better over the other. Otherwise, carbon fiber is carbon fiber - which is what the testing, yours and his, shows.


----------



## turbonockguy

the limb also has a layer of some type of ceramic material. 

I put in a request to have this closed. so if anyone wants to play "last tag" I figure time is limited.


----------



## Matt_Potter

Good Call


----------

