# Is 8125 string still your favorite recurve string or have you found something else? What have your tried liked/didn't?



## TxDefArcher (Sep 3, 2019)

That's what I'm using 

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk


----------



## Fly2High (Feb 25, 2019)

I had heard that switching from 8125 to Mercury made the arrow act weaker. Anyone experience this?

Is a Vectran string a 'no no' for recurve bows?


----------



## SHPoet (Nov 13, 2009)

This is just my opinion, so take it for what it's worth. I use 8190 for everything recurve related. 8190 is pretty skinny stuff so you have to use more strands to get what you want. I think that makes a more stable string. It seems to settle with just a few shots rather than never settling and always needing a twist here and there.


----------



## DanielFZ (May 31, 2016)

To some extent doesn't this depend on your limbs? Some limbs prefer different strings don't they? My uukhas specifically say they prefer 8125, Rhino(Astroflight) or 8190.


----------



## SHPoet (Nov 13, 2009)

DanielFZ said:


> To some extent doesn't this depend on your limbs? Some limbs prefer different strings don't they? My uukhas specifically say they prefer 8125, Rhino(Astroflight) or 8190.


Just personal opinion but I have several sets of limbs from different manufactures. I can't tell the difference of string material on any of them.

I'd like to ask Uukha why they recommend those materials.


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

I enjoy X99 and Angel string material. Both very quiet and stable. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## tunasteak (Nov 24, 2020)

8125 and D97 because it is a great happy medium between creep and durability while not being too hard on your bow like blended materials (x99). Also because smart people have looked into this and studied it. Tradlab also did a deep dive into the topic and ended up interviewing a hoyt engineer (look at post from his fb page 4/28 and 4/30).


----------



## Recurvebow (Jul 8, 2019)

Pick The BEST String Material for Recurve Style Bows:


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

I made a few a while back and I think I prefer BCY D97 - regular old FastFlite type material. The stronger stuff and anything with Vectran in it really whacks the tar out of your limbs and can make the bow louder, especially with smaller strand counts. 

It's cheaper than the newer compound materials too...

lee.


----------



## Fly2High (Feb 25, 2019)

Is 8190 made of Dyneema SK90?

I think it is. If it is, isn't SK90 also discontinued?

Will those who like 8190 move to BCY Mercury which is made from SK99, the replacement for SK90?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

There is no "best." Until and unless you're an elite shooter, you'll see no difference between the 4-5 most commonly used string materials and even then it comes down to personal preference in most cases. I couldn't even tell you what my strings are made of anymore, they are so old. I think most are 8125 and a few are Angel Dyneema or whatever that's called. Honestly don't sweat it. Too many people get hung up on string material. Nock fit and serving material are much more important.


----------



## Fly2High (Feb 25, 2019)

I have been away from archery for a while and am getting back into it. When I refer to 'best', I am asking what you found works for you or that you have a preference for. I am not suggesting anyone did a study to determine it. 

I also would like to know what you tried and did not like.

I have heard that 8125 does creep and I wonder if nocks move when adding twists to compensate. I know it isn't hard to retie a nock. I am also curious if a string for recurve will also work for my older compound. 

There is also the science guy in me that likes to hear about all the new formulas and such and hear about people's experiences with them. Maybe, one can serve double duty or maybe I will splurge and buy string material for each bow instead of trying to find one that does all.

As for BCY Mercury, I was very interested in the fact that someone posted they felt the string made well tuned arrows now act weak. Since i just purchased a Gillo G1 and I am starting to tune it, that fact interests me. Should my arrows act weak, I could see if swapping the strings might help. If my arrows tune well, I might need to tune gain or switch arrows if I choose to change strings. I am not sure I understand how a string can do this but my guess is that the string might be lighter than whatever the archer had before, transfers energy a bit better and the arrows are now going slightly faster out of the bow. Maybe that archer had a tune that worked fine but was at the hairy edge of spined perfectly and this change was enough to make them act weak. I do not know. I am just speculating. If I find others having the same experience, then that might make it something I should take into consideration.

I always wonder if a 'softer' string is more forgiving. I hear this term used from time to time. I am guessing that it refers to the amount of energy efficiency of transfer. the more transferred, I could believe the more jarring it is so a less efficient setup might hide flaws or imperfections of form better. Again, just guessing. 

Of course there is also the pros and Olympic archers. there must be a reason they choose to use older string. Why, I am not sure and am curious to find out.

I have updated the title to be more inline with my ask.

Thank you all for the feedback.


----------



## Fly2High (Feb 25, 2019)

Recurvebow said:


> Pick The BEST String Material for Recurve Style Bows:


I saw that but since many of the newer string are not listed, I think it is a little dated which is why I asked. Curious about the current state of affairs. His comments do support the desire for a softer string which may be why Mercury and Rampage have not been accepted by competitive recurve archers.

I also wonder how much string selection is a , 'ain't broke, don't fix it' kind of thing.

With Dyneema SK90 being discontinued and replaced by SK99, I wonder if SK75 will be as well. It is older. I know they have/had a SK78 but that had slightly different properties to SK75. I think the SK90/99 was more similar with less creep and stretch. 

I would be curious if Jake would review any SK99 string.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Fly2High said:


> I have been away from archery for a while and am getting back into it. When I refer to 'best', I am asking what you found works for you or that you have a preference for. I am not suggesting anyone did a study to determine it.
> 
> I also would like to know what you tried and did not like.
> 
> ...


Well you just heard from an Olympic archer, so I'm not sure what else to say except you're overthinking this. But that's not unusual at all. For some reason, Olympic recurve tends to attract people who overthink everything.


----------



## vscarf10 (Dec 31, 2019)

Fly2High said:


> I saw that but since many of the newer string are not listed, I think it is a little dated which is why I asked. Curious about the current state of affairs. His comments do support the desire for a softer string which may be why Mercury and Rampage have not been accepted by competitive recurve archers.
> 
> I also wonder how much string selection is a , 'ain't broke, don't fix it' kind of thing.
> 
> ...


I was the original poster of the BCY8125 to Mercury tune change issues. Whilst I ended up getting good flight with the Mercury string, I was not happy with winding limbs down and pushing centre shot out so far so ordered a new 8125 from a string maker I found in my city and that string was tune consistent with the original 8125 I replaced so the Mercury is now in my spare parts box. 
I have new x10 600’s that I’ve been tuning the last couple of weeks that now have bare and fletched flying straight from bow to target out to 40 metres and grouping tightly so I might just try the mercury again to see what it does to a 600 X10 that is well tuned to my setup.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

vscarf10 said:


> I was the original poster of the BCY8125 to Mercury tune change issues. Whilst I ended up getting good flight with the Mercury string, I was not happy with winding limbs down and pushing centre shot out so far so ordered a new 8125 from a string maker I found in my city and that string was tune consistent with the original 8125 I replaced so the Mercury is now in my spare parts box.
> I have new x10 600’s that I’ve been tuning the last couple of weeks that now have bare and fletched flying straight from bow to target out to 40 metres and grouping tightly so I might just try the mercury again to see what it does to a 600 X10 that is well tuned to my setup.


Be sure to weigh the strings and see what the difference is. A lot of times, the difference in tune is merely a product of the string weight.

I think it was Rick who once wrote that a good OR string should be around 100 grains. I've found that to be very true in my experience as well.


----------



## vscarf10 (Dec 31, 2019)

limbwalker said:


> Be sure to weigh the strings and see what the difference is. A lot of times, the difference in tune is merely a product of the string weight.
> 
> I think it was Rick who once wrote that a good OR string should be around 100 grains. I've found that to be very true in my experience as well.


This was from my 8125 to Mercury post 

“Just weighed both. 8125g 7.1 grams Mercury 7.0 grams so negligible weight difference”


----------



## woof156 (Apr 3, 2018)

limbwalker said:


> . For some reason, Olympic recurve tends to attract people who overthink everything.


He said with a smile . Hey don't look at me, I shoot Barebow and we NEVER overthink anything-- I said with a smile


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

woof156 said:


> He said with a smile . Hey don't look at me, I shoot Barebow and we NEVER overthink anything-- I said with a smile


Yea, but at least barebow shooters have fewer pieces of kit to overthink about.


----------



## Fly2High (Feb 25, 2019)

limbwalker said:


> Well you just heard from an Olympic archer, so I'm not sure what else to say except you're overthinking this. But that's not unusual at all. For some reason, Olympic recurve tends to attract people who overthink everything.


For me, I like various facets of archery.

I like the ties to the old world being primitive.
I like that you need to develop skill to shoot. It is not like anyone can just pick up a bow and shoot. It takes practice.
There is the scientist in me that likes to research new products and understand the benefits and disadvantages.
I enjoy the skill of tuning a bow, be it compound or recurve.
I am interested in building my own strings and the art and skill of that aspect.
I enjoy the competition and comradery found in our numbers.

To me, this is not about overthinking to get some perceived advantage. I also like talking shop and chat about various products. Always looking to gain some knowledge or insight into things.

I will say I am an avid fan of Jake's and enjoy his videos. Have learned a lot from him and others, as well as you. I love that this hobby is so free flowing of wisdom almost like what would only have been from father to son. I have a lot of respect for those skilled at various aspects of archery and have the willingness to share that knowledge with others. 

Archery has so many ways to be enjoyed and I am grateful for so many who support it in various ways. 

As for your advice, maybe when it comes time to order some string material in the coming weeks, I might just go with any one of the string materials and try it out. Regardless, I find the information interesting. I never would have thought about string weight affecting speed and/or tune. I would have expected a larger weight difference to have a smaller affect. Learn something new every day. Will keep it in mind. 

Thank you to all who contribute. the advice is well appreciated.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Fly2High said:


> For me, I like various facets of archery.
> 
> I like the ties to the old world being primitive.
> I like that you need to develop skill to shoot. It is not like anyone can just pick up a bow and shoot. It takes practice.
> ...


5 grains of string weight is almost (not quite) like 5 grains of nock end weight, which equals about 10 grains of point weight when it comes to tuning. 

Just the difference between a brass nocking point and a thread one will change a tune significantly.

BUT, an archer has to first be skilled enough to see the difference. Few are. Most archers would be better off just finding a reasonable tune and then training more/harder. Typically, archers - even veteran archers - scores reflect their endurance (or lack thereof) much more than anything related to their equipment. 

People want to talk "mental game" a lot, but fail to make the connection to endurance, which is a mistake.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Fly -

Yeah, you're over thinking it. Strings (properly made ones anyway) are like toasters, they either work or don't. 8125 or D97 is fine (same material, just different diameters, and yes, there is some creep, but not enough to worry about. If you make your own, you can adjust the size accordingly and if you buy them already made, you can just add a few twists. 

Don't get me wrong, different materials do have slightly different characteristics, but it's never enough to worry about, IMHO anyway.

Viper1 out.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

Fly2High said:


> For me, I like various facets of archery.
> 
> I like the ties to the old world being primitive.
> I like that you need to develop skill to shoot. It is not like anyone can just pick up a bow and shoot. It takes practice.
> ...


Even on the *compound *bow, the only truly significant differences between modern materials is how much of a PITA the material is when building the strings. Eg. how much does it stretch in the tensioning phases and how much does it shrink back up after the string is made. And the normal PITA of different formulas having different strand thicknesses which goofs up your procedures in getting the finished diameter right and so on. That's about it.

There is some evidence that some of the modern materials creep slightly more than others, eg. the Vectran blends like X99/452x etc. are more stable with respect to creep than pure UHMPE materials like Mercury. But that's kind of debatable with the really high quality materials like Mercury.

But apart from that, I've never been able to tell when my compounds had 452x or Bcy X on them (X isn't made anymore tho) when it comes to shooting. The only differences I encountered were on the jig when I was making the strings. Really old materials like FastFlite? yeah, you'll get creep on a compound. New materials like SK99? Maybe, maybe not.

So on the recurve..... well, that's just a way of saying put it out of your mind as far as shooting the bow. Other factors like does it make the bow louder (indicating it's hammering the limbs harder) and does it look nice are better reasons to prefer one material over the other.

This shouldn't even be bugging you on the shooting line with a compound, much less on a recurve....

lee.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

It is sometimes helpful to know who the archers are that obsess over their gear though. That way you can ask questions like "so are you still happy with that string material now that they've come out with a newer one?" on the shooting line.


----------



## Fly2High (Feb 25, 2019)

I have a question.

If a string creeps or is affected by heat (as 8125 has been suggested), what do you need to do to correct for it?
Is just placing a few twists in every now and again enough?
Do you need to redo your knocking point periodically?
For Olympic, do you need to move the nose button?
How often should one expect to add twists, etc? Time or number of arrows here.

Clearly it is a bigger PITA on a compound to do this since a press is needed but basic on a recurve. Still, it is good to be aware of changes.

Frank


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Fly2High said:


> I have a question.
> 
> If a string creeps or is affected by heat (as 8125 has been suggested), what do you need to do to correct for it?
> Is just placing a few twists in every now and again enough?
> ...


Just put a twist or two in it and go shoot. Once it settles, you'll rarely have to mess with it. I have 8125 strings that haven't moved in years. Even if they have, I'd better be on my game to notice the difference. I'm talking 320+ at 70m


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

lees said:


> I made a few a while back and I think I prefer BCY D97 - regular old FastFlite type material. The stronger stuff and anything with Vectran in it really whacks the tar out of your limbs and can make the bow louder, especially with smaller strand counts.
> 
> It's cheaper than the newer compound materials too...
> 
> lee.


Ackchahwally, D97 is the same material as 8125, D97 is just a thicker strand of 8125. It is BCY 652 that is the contemporary FastFlight. 

I've been using 8125 strings for several years. Of course it's going to stretch a little from brand new after some shots. But just shoot it in and it is stable. I've recently tried a couple BCY 652 (FastFlight) strings (just cuz I wanted to, it's my money, I earned it, I'm an adult, I'll spend my money however I want) and they seem to need more shots to shoot in, but are stable once shot in.


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

TER said:


> Ackchahwally, D97 is the same material as 8125, D97 is just a thicker strand of 8125. It is BCY 652 that is the contemporary FastFlight.
> 
> I've been using 8125 strings for several years. Of course it's going to stretch a little from brand new after some shots. But just shoot it in and it is stable. I've recently tried a couple BCY 652 (FastFlight) strings (just cuz I wanted to, it's my money, I earned it, I'm an adult, I'll spend my money however I want) and they seem to need more shots to shoot in, but are stable once shot in.


Yep that's true. I just kinda call them both "FastFlite" because they're close enough. Dyneema SK75 is practically the same thing. They're both excellent materials, though. On older wheel bows, where a little creep doesn't make any difference, regular ol FastFlite was super duper modern when it came out. And we all fell all over ourselves to get the newfangled FF strung bows.... Way better than the old steel cables anyway 

lee.


----------



## woof156 (Apr 3, 2018)

limbwalker said:


> Yea, but at least barebow shooters have fewer pieces of kit to overthink about.


True enuf but what we have we really really really over think it--for instance" when I am hot gluing points how do I know I have the hot glue spread evenly around the insert of the point so as not to cause an imbalance and an arrow wobble"??? Will that imbalance cause me a problem in accuracy--I stay awake at night???


----------



## vscarf10 (Dec 31, 2019)

Fly2High said:


> I have been away from archery for a while and am getting back into it. When I refer to 'best', I am asking what you found works for you or that you have a preference for. I am not suggesting anyone did a study to determine it.
> 
> I also would like to know what you tried and did not like.
> 
> ...


Here's an update for your curiosity Fly2High. 

This morning I tested 3 strings all being 64.5" long with my new X10s. Keep in mind my initial Mercury string tune issues was with ACE 670's

Today- Bow 36.2lb with brace at 21.6cm, Tiller +1mm top limb and underside of top NP is 1.1cm above square. Arrow Easton X10 600 27.95" to BOP with 120 tungsten's unbroken. Centre shot is 1 full arrow shaft left of string for best flight of bare and fletched. Beiter plunger 4.0 on medium spring. Fibre optic pin in middle of aperture is approx 5mm left of string at brace and arrows were shot at 18 metres and also 29 metres in comparison (did not shoot 29m for loose nock Mercury string as was not confident of arrow flight)

1. BCY8125g 7.1 grams
2. Mercury 7.3 grams (this string had more snug nock fit almost same as 8125g)
3. Mercury 6.9 grains (this was the troublesome string with quite loose nock fit according to the string maker due to Beiter large groove being looser than Easton large groove which is what the string center serving was made based on)

With everything being equal in terms of bow set up between all 3 strings, I have come to the conclusion that Mercury string with similar nock fitment as the 8125 changed the MY tune only small amount as fletched was just slightly and bare shaft a little more so tail left when compared to the 8125. Mercury string felt snappier but quieter than the 8125 to my ears.

The loose nock fit Mercury string made a significant change to arrow behaviour and even with stiffer arrow in X10 600 vs the 670 ACE previously, the tail was still very left in flight and the fletched were working overtime to correct arrow flight as it was fishtailing at 18 metres.

So based on my shooting style, something as simple as looser nock fit can change my arrow tune considerably. As always YMMV

Here's a clip for your amusement showing the 3 strings affect on arrows with best tune with the 8125. Bare and Fletched Arrows were shot multiple times with all 3 strings and flight was consistent each time based on the string used at the time, apart from when my release was crappy


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

vscarf10 said:


> Here's an update for your curiosity Fly2High.
> 
> This morning I tested 3 strings all being 64.5" long with my new X10s. Keep in mind my initial Mercury string tune issues was with ACE 670's
> 
> ...


Not to turn this into a tuning forum, but I would play with that center shot again. A full arrow diameter out seems like a lot to me. Also, don’t use the loose nock fit. Too risky


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

Material might make a difference if you make your own strings. D97 is cheapest and works well. 8190 requires more strands than 8125. If you are better at keeping tension on "more or less strands", then that may be the best string material for you. When I was shooting FITA barebow target I could tell the difference in cast at 90 meters. Now that I am shooting field, I am not pushing that envelope any longer.


----------



## UK_Stretch (Mar 22, 2006)

Personally I like Angel Majesty 777, no idea about speed (I really never have given a stuff about one product being faster than another..) but it sounds nice on my bows compared to FF, FF+ and 8125. Shot feels a little tighter with less vibration.

Does it shoot better? Only because mentally I respond better to a nice quiet, smooth bow. When my bow is noisy or vibrates a lot that little b*ugger at the back of my brain keeps whispering “…somethings not right here…”.

Stretch


----------



## vscarf10 (Dec 31, 2019)

Gregjlongbow said:


> Not to turn this into a tuning forum, but I would play with that center shot again. A full arrow diameter out seems like a lot to me. Also, don’t use the loose nock fit. Too risky
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yeah it’s not where I would prefer it but the slow mo doesn’t lie as a couple of days previously with the only the 8125, I tried dead center, half shaft left of string and full shaft left of string at 30 and 40m. Dead centre was bare shaft flying tail left all the way and fletched had some flight correction from fishtailing , half shaft out was better but still not straight So full out is where it ended up.

With all centre shot settings I tried, there was absolutely no arrow contract with rest, riser or double tap on plunger after release so the flight was not affected by anything other than my release but I shot plenhty to take the bad releases out of the equation.

It doesn’t make sense to me as I’m maybe 1-2 spines stiff already based on charts and if I was the push centre shot back closer to center then I either need stiffen plunger a lot, trim arrow down further which I don’t want to as shaft end is almost at back end of shelf or I take point weight off which also I don’t want to do as 120 is what I want as it’s almost always windy where I shoot to 70m


----------



## vscarf10 (Dec 31, 2019)

vscarf10 said:


> Yeah it’s not where I would prefer it but the slow mo doesn’t lie as a couple of days previously with the only the 8125, I tried dead center, half shaft left of string and full shaft left of string at 30 and 40m. Dead centre was bare shaft flying tail left all the way and fletched had some flight correction from fishtailing , half shaft out was better but still not straight so full out is where it ended up.
> 
> With all centre shot settings I tried, there was absolutely no arrow contact with rest, riser or double tap on plunger after release so the flight was not affected by anything other than my release but I shot plenty to take the bad releases out of the equation.
> 
> It doesn’t make sense to me as I’m maybe 1-2 spines stiff already based on charts and if I was the push centre shot back closer to center then I either need stiffen plunger a lot, trim arrow down further which I don’t want to as shaft end is almost at back end of shelf or I take point weight off which also I don’t want to do as 120 is what I want as it’s almost always windy where I shoot to 70m


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

UK_Stretch said:


> Personally I like Angel Majesty 777, no idea about speed (I really never have given a stuff about one product being faster than another..) but it sounds nice on my bows compared to FF, FF+ and 8125. Shot feels a little tighter with less vibration.
> 
> Does it shoot better? Only because mentally I respond better to a nice quiet, smooth bow. When my bow is noisy or vibrates a lot that little b*ugger at the back of my brain keeps whispering “…somethings not right here…”.
> 
> Stretch


I'm the same way. And yes, Angel is nice stuff. Thicker strings also have a nice sound to them.


----------



## UK_Stretch (Mar 22, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> I'm the same way. And yes, Angel is nice stuff. Thicker strings also have a nice sound to them.


I shot 22 strand Angel ASB for years (think Avalon to Axis) - nice and ropey for extreme finger comfort… but my Velos limbs sound terrible with thick strings. They are quiet with 18 and noisier than I like with 20. Go figure. It was quite a journey to get there (actually suggested by someone on here - sorry can’t credit them because I forget easy these days…)

Downside was i had to buy a ton of #1 Beiter nocks and still haven’t worked out what to do with the #2‘s.

Stretch


----------



## bluedevil49 (Jun 22, 2012)

Fly2High, I make my own strings. I used to shoot 8125G, but when I first saw Angel Majesty 777, I thought I'd give it a go.

So with the same serving on both strings and the same nock fit (Easton large pin nock) I found the 777 to be faster and louder than the 8125G.

Recently, I was speaking to a current Aussie Olympian and he's using BCY652. It's very quiet and at 53lbs OTF, the speed was still there. I bought a small spool of that and tried that myself. I found it to very quiet, but also slower. My sight marks were 4mm lower at 70m.

I'm going to stick with the 777 for no other reason than I bought a 2.4km spool as I make a lot of strings for people in my club. Though I might try some different serving sizes to make some fatter and thinner strings.


----------



## Fly2High (Feb 25, 2019)

I recently reached out to BCY for advice for my Gillo G1 and for an old ‘97 Hoyt Enticer compound. The old Enticer had FastFlight. They suggested 652, D97 and seemed to suggest the 8125 and Mercury might also work as they seem to be slight upgrades but enough give to not damage the old bow. I am thinking of going with 8125 just because it might work out for both bows. With a 1/8 lb spool of black, I might get 3 string sets for the pair at most. If the first sets work out , I can always get other colors later and/or use the black for a pinstripe or contrasting color. It won’t go unused.


----------



## UK_Stretch (Mar 22, 2006)

bluedevil49 said:


> Fly2High, I make my own strings. I used to shoot 8125G, but when I first saw Angel Majesty 777, I thought I'd give it a go.
> 
> So with the same serving on both strings and the same nock fit (Easton large pin nock) I found the 777 to be faster and louder than the 8125G.


What limbs, arrow and draw weight?

32” x10 450 at 42# off long Hoyt Velos limbs is very quiet as long as I used fewer strands (Xi riser). Not so much with 20 strands and just like everything else with 22. (Small beiter nocks in/out, 4.5, 4.5x and pin)

Many, many, many folks use 652 because it is as good as anything else and they can’t be bothered pfaffing  Some of us like to play.🤡

Stretch


----------



## Gregjlongbow (Jun 15, 2016)

Angel Majesty is the quietest bow I’ve ever shot. It was Xceed, Zest longs, 43# otf a 16 strand Majesty with Angel serving with Easton smalls. It sounded like nothing. Mildest little thump and that’s it. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

bluedevil49 said:


> Fly2High, I make my own strings. I used to shoot 8125G, but when I first saw Angel Majesty 777, I thought I'd give it a go.
> 
> So with the same serving on both strings and the same nock fit (Easton large pin nock) I found the 777 to be faster and louder than the 8125G.
> 
> ...


I like my 8125g. Makes a nice smooth quiet string.


----------



## Rick McKinney (Mar 4, 2008)

I have tried almost every string material available over the years including dacron when it was the only type of string available. I really believe that archers migrate towards what the top archers are using. After all, they have proven that it works! However, there are several choices an archer needs to make. I found some materials to be very harsh "feeling" on the shot. These strings have very little "elongation" properties. They usually will cause your arrow to act weak but you will lose distance. Some have a very "soft" feel. They will make your arrow tune stiff and gain distance. I have been testing the latest material, Mercury. Every archer I asked to try it have done so but then took it off their bow. It appears to be a bit harsh and the bow is a little loud. I had some archers try the old Angel Dyneema (the most popular choice in the 1980's - virtually the entire 20 USAT members used it by choice. However, most of today's archers took that string off as well after shooting it for the day. It appears that most like the new Angel 777 Majesty. When they use it, they like the feel, the sound and the distance it gives them. Some still use the 8125 but as I said, most are migrating towards the Majesty material. I put it on my bow some time ago and have not used anything else. If you are getting a little "elongation" after shooting it for a few shots, you might want to consider adding a couple of strands to the next string. Usually it will eliminate the "elongation". The reason I am using "elongation" terminology is that the string will come back to it's original length once the bow is unstrung. I could be wrong about this but that was what I was told when Fastflight and Dyneema were first introduced into archery. This is all recurve. Compounds need the less "elongation" material or realistically no "stretch". I have about 50 archers I am coaching and they are my lab mice. They don't mind since they know I am trying to find what works best for them and the team. Oh, and if you add a couple of strands, you can use a thinner serving material to get the same thickness for your nocks.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Difference between Angel Majesty, Angel Majesty Pro, and Angel 777 Majesty? LAS shows regular and Pro are .016" diameter, no details on 777. I've always had best results using the regular Angel Majesty compared to anything else, but didn't know if there was reason to change to Pro or 777.


----------



## bluedevil49 (Jun 22, 2012)

UK_Stretch said:


> What limbs, arrow and draw weight?
> 
> 32” x10 450 at 42# off long Hoyt Velos limbs is very quiet as long as I used fewer strands (Xi riser). Not so much with 20 strands and just like everything else with 22. (Small beiter nocks in/out, 4.5, 4.5x and pin)
> 
> ...


Uukha VX1000 longs, Skylon Paragon 500 spine and 49# OTF @ 30"DL.



UK_Stretch said:


> Some of us like to play.🤡


Yep, I definitely fall into that category

So UK_Stretch, do you think it will get quieter if I go less strands?


----------



## UK_Stretch (Mar 22, 2006)

bluedevil49 said:


> So UK_Stretch, do you think it will get quieter if I go less strands?


I can’t guess really. You have faster limbs, higher draw weight and lighter arrow. All I know is dropping from 20 st to 18 st and going down a nock size made a big difference for me. If you want a quieter bow it is probably worth a try. (And maybe more intuitively go up to 22 as well).

Not a big job to whip up a string or two to try.



Seattlepop said:


> Difference between Angel Majesty, Angel Majesty Pro, and Angel 777 Majesty? LAS shows regular and Pro are .016" diameter, no details on 777. I've always had best results using the regular Angel Majesty compared to anything else, but didn't know if there was reason to change to Pro or 777.


I found Majesty and Majesty Pro very similar. At 70m with all other variables the same the group moved maybe 1 or 2 zones to the right (right handed). Shot felt the same. Groups were near as damit the same. Bare shaft looked pretty much the same. Adding some clicks to move the group to the yellow didn’t change group size.

For me, 777 still has that very ”tight” feel you get with majesty but with less noise and vibration. It’s not huge but it is noticeable. If you put it on a bang stick it won’t turn it into a stealth stick. I won’t comment on tune because I changed too many things to be comparable (from memory anyway). Groups are no worse and probably no better... but it feels good.

I wouldn’t bother with Pro - nothing wrong with it but I can’t determine how it is different really. 777 is worth a shot.

I think they are all about the same diameter - certainly within getting the same nock fit with the same serving. Apologies if that is a bum steer.

Did I mention it comes in yellow… nice yellow… not icky neon yellow. These things are important 

Stretch


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)




----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)




----------



## azureblue (Oct 27, 2014)

If I normally use 22 strands 8125 how how many strands of 777 would give the same string diameter?


----------



## UK_Stretch (Mar 22, 2006)

azureblue said:


> If I normally use 22 strands 8125 how how many strands of 777 would give the same string diameter?


I don’t have any 8125 to hand. An 18 strand 777 string is about 2.1mm diameter and 2.6mm diameter when served with 0.021” Majesty Serving (0.53mm).

I seem to recall 20st BCY 8125 being similar to 20 str Majesty but it’s been a while… so subject to editorial correction 

Stretch


----------



## bluedevil49 (Jun 22, 2012)

UK_Stretch said:


> I can’t guess really. You have faster limbs, higher draw weight and lighter arrow. All I know is dropping from 20 st to 18 st and going down a nock size made a big difference for me. If you want a quieter bow it is probably worth a try. (And maybe more intuitively go up to 22 as well).
> 
> Not a big job to whip up a string or two to try.


I tried a 14 strand with a 22 strand core and it is a very different noise. 14 may be a bit low, so I'm thinking I'll give and 18 a go. My current one is a 22 so going to an 18 should be a happy medium.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

My views based on tying several thousand strings over the last 24 years or so and setting up hundreds of Olympic and Bare bows. 1) Limbwalker's comments are extremely valid-most people cannot really tell the difference. 2) I have used Angel but not nearly to the extent of Rick McKinney's experience so I suspect his observations on it are spot on. I tend to use BCY products because the guys at BCY have been generous to my club and very helpful when I sought advice. However, I have used Brownell material as well-usually when it was given to me by people who were getting out of tying strings or when it was substantially discounted by LAS when the original company ceased operating.

For most of my first 10-15 years tying strings, D97 was my go to material. It has the advantage of needing less strands, meaning it is easier to get uniform tension. A key fact if I have to make someone string in a hurry (I normally leave the strands on my jig for at least an hour to allow the strands to even out). D97, and its thinner brother, 8125 wear well, don't have much creep and generally work well for just about anyone. The new Mercury-and the now discontinued 8190 are a little "harder" feeling when shot out of heavier limbs, and creep slightly less. Especially in hot conditions-at least from what I have noticed. I have made a ton of strings out of 8190 and 8190F for two reasons: one, when it was discontinued, LAS discounted it substantially and that saves my club some money. Secondly, I have lots of BB archers and I adopted the sound advice John Wert gave me at a BB seminar he held at Archery World USA a couple years ago-recommending using the .30 HALO (or the slightly thicker POWER GRIP) center serving for BB archers-the thicker strands allow counting easier. You have to use less strands to do this, and the thin stuff allows a stronger stringer then say 12 strands of D97.So for some of my BB archers-I use mercury. My wife Liz really likes it (and she has been a guinea pig for many of my creations).

Several of my best recurve archers-especially those shooting heavier (which for my club 36 on up pound limbs) like the 652. My top ladies recurve archer said it felt softer than 8125 or 8190 or other Dyneema blends. Plus, of all the BCY stuff, it is the most economical so for club strings, we use lots of that. I personally shoot it on my Gillo GT because 7years ago, I blew out the tendon in my draw elbow and 652 is slightly easier on my elbow than the other stuff.

All that being said, nock fit is more important IMHO than getting hung up on dyneema v Spectra: I never recommend Vectra blends for recurves btw


----------



## nuts&bolts (Mar 25, 2005)

vscarf10 said:


> This was from my 8125 to Mercury post
> 
> “Just weighed both. 8125g 7.1 grams Mercury 7.0 grams so negligible weight difference”


7.1 grams = 109 grains
7.0 grams = 108 grains


----------



## lameduck (Jul 24, 2019)

I want my string as thin as possible, and all custom string makers (local and online) I have ordered from can't make 8125 bowstring that matches the slim D97 strings I have been getting from non-custom suppliers. 

So this makes D97 the best string material for me. I just wonder if the same would be the case if I was making my own string.


----------



## BuzzMA (Jan 11, 2010)

String diameters? I have tried to find but not been successful in finding the diameters of various materials. I'm not sure why this is since center serving diameters are typically listed in the product description. If I want to try a new material and not risk having to change all my nocks it would make sense to know the diameter so that I can determine if the center serving I have will give me the correct diameter or whether I need to buy a different serving size. Specifically I currently have 18 strand Fastflite with .014 Halo center serving which works with .088" nocks. I am thinking of buying some 8125 or perhaps Majesty based on Rick McKinney's comments. Does anyone know where this information might be?


----------



## UK_Stretch (Mar 22, 2006)

Ashe Morgan did some comparisons and put them here but it doesn’t include Majesty string material. I’ll leave you to interpret his results and compare with yours. Your selection sits in his tight/tolerable zone. (If you are using FF+.)

I think the problem is that the servings approximate a round profile. Most of the string fibres are a flat profile so it‘s more difficult to provide a useful measurement of the fibre alone (but no reason not to provide an estimate for the final string in common strand counts).

BCY do have recommendations on their site but I am not convinced that they give the same nock fit.

I have Majesty in 0.015, 0.019 and 0.021 and still sometimes have to fiddle with extra strands and tension to get the right fit.

Stretch


----------



## Nojiri (Nov 15, 2019)

UK_Stretch said:


> ...For me, 777 still has that very ”tight” feel you get with majesty but with less noise and vibration. It’s not huge but it is noticeable. If you put it on a bang stick it won’t turn it into a stealth stick. I won’t comment on tune because I changed too many things to be comparable (from memory anyway). Groups are no worse and probably no better... but it feels good.
> 
> I wouldn’t bother with Pro - nothing wrong with it but I can’t determine how it is different really. 777 is worth a shot...
> 
> Stretch


+1 for Angel Majesty 777. Quiet and fast (feels fast). Agree with you, Stretch; hard to describe, but "feels good". I serve mine with Angel Izanas ASB.

Cheers!
Nojiri


----------

