# bcy x and fury user findings



## Fenwayrick (Aug 19, 2013)

Personally I feel Fury is smoother, quicker, quieter and setup is a lot easier. You can practically pull the strings off the stretcher and put it right on the bow.


----------



## lachypetersen22 (Oct 17, 2014)

Been using the bcy x by 60x and its pretty good, no stretch and it definitely doesn't fuzz up like 452x. And it holds color well. Like the look of fury but heard it sucks at holding color.


----------



## runninghounds (Sep 2, 2012)

Having switched from bcy to fury by brownell no reason to ever deal with string stretch,peep rotation,fuzzing the fury just don't do this as far as colors fading IMO only thing fading is BCy


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> bcy x and fury. I have built sets of both, read info on both, heard facts and rumors on both, and now that they have been on bows for awhile I was wondering how the materials are performing on the bow. I know how good one finishes over the other and ones prices are better but I am looking for shooters opinion on these two materials. No bashing, just fact based personal experience. Thanks


I've been using BCY's BCY-X since it was first developed and do not believe anything out there will match it. BCY holds the patent on this blend so it can't be copied. BCY's BCY-X uses only genuine Dyneema SK90 in the blend, the highest quality HMPE available. BCY also uses nothing but the best quality HMPE - SK75, SK78 and SK90 or Type 1000 Spectra. Not bashing anyone but this can't be said for some other material suppliers. 



runninghounds said:


> Having switched from bcy to fury by brownell no reason to ever deal with string stretch,peep rotation,fuzzing the fury just don't do this as far as colors fading IMO only thing fading is BCy


My that's a strange statement considering how many of your products have been filling up the boneyard over the years.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

I have not seen any difference in fading between BCY and Brownell. Both flo greens will fade if left in the sun too long. Same with both flo orange. I have not seen any non-flo colors fade from either except BCY red which fades quite a bit. Brownell's Red has too much color (needs wiped down in build process), BCY's red does not have enough color (fades to pinkish)…toss up. No advantage to either in fading. Now as for shot feel, Fury has a touch softer shot feel, its quieter, makes higher arrow speed, is more durable in regards to fuzzing up, nobody can disagree that Fury makes a smoother, cleaner looking string with bolder color, it creeps less on stretchers and takes a LOT longer to stretch. On the bow it seems both are more than strong enough to hold against creep. No difference in creep on the bow just on stretchers, Fury is more flexible to work with because of the micro strand size. You can do 24,26,28,30,32,34 strands….. X is thicker so you can really choose 22,24,26,28 strands. Fury is more consistent from the manufacturer. Color is always the same, strand sizes are always the same, etc. Much faster customer service, faster shipping and less quality issues from Brownell. BCY-X does have vectran so in theory it should resist creep better in high heat. I have yet to see a Fury string set creep in high heat like we used to see with 8190. The vectran gives some peace of mind to ex-8190 users there. Until i hear about any case of Fury creeping in heat i will call it a tie with a slight advantage to BCY X for the added confidence of having a small amount of Vectran which is technically more heat stable. 

The small strand size i would say is Fury's only real disadvantage (aside from slightly higher price) when its on the bow as it may be easier to cut a strand improperly installing a peep or using one of those titanium peeps. 

Both materials perform extremely well. Both outperform all previous materials. Neither is bad but each has its advantages. Fury has more advantages than X so thats what i choose between the 2.


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

6 on one half a dozen on the other IMO. I think it is much more important to find a good builder to work with and then just use what he is more comfortable building with. Just my opinion though.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

retrieverfishin said:


> 6 on one half a dozen on the other IMO. I think it is much more important to find a good builder to work with and then just use what he is more comfortable building with. Just my opinion though.


I agree with you 1000%! The OP is a string builder so asking opinion as a string builder. For the rest out there….Choose your builder and let them decide which material works best for your bow and their build process or you could end up with something like this: http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2474329

Both materials are great. Some builders prefer one over the other. One thing is a FACT: Some string builders don't give a damn about quality. Choose a reputable builder. There are a LOT of reputable builders on here that put out great work with both materials.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> I agree with you 1000%! The OP is a string builder so asking opinion as a string builder. For the rest out there….Choose your builder and let them decide which material works best for your bow and their build process or you could end up with something like this: http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2474329
> 
> Both materials are great. Some builders prefer one over the other. One thing is a FACT: Some string builders don't give a damn about quality. Choose a reputable builder. There are a LOT of reputable builders on here that put out great work with both materials.


Sad thing about that picture is some of the serving looks good but those loops...omg.. I'm speechless!!


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> I have not seen any difference in fading between BCY and Brownell. Both flo greens will fade if left in the sun too long. Same with both flo orange. I have not seen any non-flo colors fade from either except BCY red which fades quite a bit. Brownell's Red has too much color (needs wiped down in build process), BCY's red does not have enough color (fades to pinkish)…toss up. No advantage to either in fading. Now as for shot feel, Fury has a touch softer shot feel, its quieter, makes higher arrow speed, is more durable in regards to fuzzing up, nobody can disagree that Fury makes a smoother, cleaner looking string with bolder color, it creeps less on stretchers and takes a LOT longer to stretch. On the bow it seems both are more than strong enough to hold against creep. No difference in creep on the bow just on stretchers, Fury is more flexible to work with because of the micro strand size. You can do 24,26,28,30,32,34 strands….. X is thicker so you can really choose 22,24,26,28 strands. Fury is more consistent from the manufacturer. Color is always the same, strand sizes are always the same, etc. Much faster customer service, faster shipping and less quality issues from Brownell. BCY-X does have vectran so in theory it should resist creep better in high heat. I have yet to see a Fury string set creep in high heat like we used to see with 8190. The vectran gives some peace of mind to ex-8190 users there. Until i hear about any case of Fury creeping in heat i will call it a tie with a slight advantage to BCY X for the added confidence of having a small amount of Vectran which is technically more heat stable.
> 
> The small strand size i would say is Fury's only real disadvantage (aside from slightly higher price) when its on the bow as it may be easier to cut a strand improperly installing a peep or using one of those titanium peeps.
> 
> Both materials perform extremely well. Both outperform all previous materials. Neither is bad but each has its advantages. Fury has more advantages than X so thats what i choose between the 2.


Thanks. Lots of facts and personal opinion from a very reputable top end builder.


----------



## Cbfastcar (May 19, 2015)

Bcy-x holds the colour very nice I have shot a lot of arrows using it and i still get people telling me it looks new and I really can't tell the difference between when it was new to old the only thing I notice is that since it was the stock string it stretched a little bit and has some peep twist but that could be expected from it I guess since its stock


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Cbfastcar said:


> Bcy-x holds the colour very nice I have shot a lot of arrows using it and i still get people telling me it looks new and I really can't tell the difference between when it was new to old the only thing I notice is that since it was the stock string it stretched a little bit and has some peep twist but that could be expected from it I guess since its stock


unfortunately that could be a string issue but more than likely a build issue.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I haven't used X on my bows but I've had 3 sets of Fury on them since I got my sample from Brownell. The first set I made never budged after being put on the bow. I shot it for spring turkey and all summer and it stayed exactly the same. No peep rotation, no creep and my tune never changed. The 2 newer sets are exactly the same. They've got a lot of shooting on them and they look brand new and have not crept a bit. 2 of the sets have had Flo Orange in them and neither have shown any fade to the color.

Like I said, I can't personally speak to X's long term qualities but Fury has been outstanding for me.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Huntinsker said:


> I haven't used X on my bows but I've had 3 sets of Fury on them since I got my sample from Brownell. The first set I made never budged after being put on the bow. I shot it for spring turkey and all summer and it stayed exactly the same. No peep rotation, no creep and my tune never changed. The 2 newer sets are exactly the same. They've got a lot of shooting on them and they look brand new and have not crept a bit. 2 of the sets have had Flo Orange in them and neither have shown any fade to the color.
> 
> Like I said, I can't personally speak to X's long term qualities but Fury has been outstanding for me.


My first experience with fury was a sample of flo orange. I made a test string and stuck it on the window ledge and it has been there for around 90 days and looks like I just made it. I have bcy x on one bow and fury on another. Neither has had any issues with peep rotation, fading, or tuning issues. my next step is to build the opposite material string for the bows and see the difference.


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

I will say I have had pretty good luck with X but am very close to trying some Fury out.....and have a bow I am setting up right now that I could try it on....hmmm....


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

retrieverfishin said:


> I will say I have had pretty good luck with X but am very close to trying some Fury out.....and have a bow I am setting up right now that I could try it on....hmmm....


You will LOVE Fury.


----------



## Chris1ny (Oct 23, 2006)

Great experiences with BCY-X, fast, no complaints.

Just got a bow with Fury strings...beautiful strings, but need some testing time.


----------



## PAKraig (Sep 19, 2005)

retrieverfishin said:


> I will say I have had pretty good luck with X but am very close to trying some Fury out.....and have a bow I am setting up right now that I could try it on....hmmm....


If you're thinking what I think you're thinking.....go for it! Tri-color white, charcoal and whatever brown looks best :thumb:


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

Ray knight said:


> You will LOVE Fury.


I stretch everything min 12 hours so no worries about stretch time here.


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

PAKraig said:


> If you're thinking what I think you're thinking.....go for it! Tri-color white, charcoal and whatever brown looks best :thumb:


I think I have a volunteer for another tester!


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

retrieverfishin said:


> I stretch everything min 12 hours so no worries about stretch time here.


Perfect then. Same process.


----------



## PAKraig (Sep 19, 2005)

Not a builder here, but a heavy user. I've had Fury sets on 3 bows now (Bowtech ODBs if that matters) and I'm picky, especially about peep rotation. 

I'm no tuner, so I'm used to having to go back to the shop after a couple hundred arrows to have my peep fine-tuned.....no adjustment needed with the Fury. Haven't had a stringset built w/ BCY-X yet, but as long as I'm working with a builder willing to use Fury, I don't see any reason to try the X, IMHO.

Thanks Mike!


----------



## nagster (Nov 29, 2007)

Goin on a year of bcy-x built by breathn on here.. Still look like the day i put em on my CS34.

They been rained on. Snowed on. In the sun. In the heat in the cold..


----------



## spot&dot (Nov 4, 2003)

I have a couple sets from 60X made from X that are over a year old and still look new with no movement. I also have a fury set from 60X that's a couple months old and other then a little fading it hasn't budged either. I do like the wet look that fury gives. I think both are great high end materials.


----------



## HAPS (Apr 7, 2015)

I have been using bcyx since it came out and I love it but I am thinking of also offering fury material in the near future.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

spot&#729 said:


> I have a couple sets from 60X made from X that are over a year old and still look new with no movement. I also have a fury set from 60X that's a couple months old and other then a little fading it hasn't budged either. I do like the wet look that fury gives I think both are great high end materials.


 There is no doubt that fury finishes incredible. It makes me look like I know what I'm doin when I make a set!


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

If you can get by the hidden agenda's, "personal" opinions, etc., one simple fact remains: BCY products have withstood the test of time and their track record continues to stand on its own merit. On the other hand, many of the competition's "better than" products have come and gone only to be reintroduced as the next "better than" product. BCY also isn't hiding what material they use... I have to assume this is because they use only the best yarn available.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I also like knowing what materials my strings are made from. I never used 8190 because I felt like it would not be as stable as a material with vectran. If I use fury I wont have a clue what it is made from. 

I understand that most people could care less what material is used as long as it works. But I am not one of those.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

EPLC said:


> If you can get by the hidden agenda's, "personal" opinions, etc., one simple fact remains: BCY products have withstood the test of time and their track record continues to stand on its own merit. On the other hand, many of the competition's "better than" products have come and gone only to be reintroduced as the next "better than" product. BCY also isn't hiding what material they use... I have to assume this is because they use only the best yarn available.


I noticed on brownell website that fury and I think rhino were 100% UHMWPE. Does that mean the only difference between those two is strand size and wax? I am just wondering. I am still in string materials and their meaning 101. I haven't seen a definition of what that material is unless it's a trade secret? Anyway I figured someone on here would know.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I am not sure but I think that there are several grades of UHMWPE.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> I noticed on brownell website that fury and I think rhino were 100% UHMWPE. Does that mean the only difference between those two is strand size and wax? I am just wondering. I am still in string materials and their meaning 101. I haven't seen a definition of what that material is unless it's a trade secret? Anyway I figured someone on here would know.


Based on the information given I guess you could assume they are the same material but who knows? These are just acronyms that cover a very large umbrella and there are many grades of these very generic acronyms. 

Here's a link from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-molecular-weight_polyethylene

But here's a small excerpt: "Ultra-high-molecular-weight polyethylene (UHMWPE, UHMW) is a subset of the thermoplastic polyethylene. Also known as high-modulus polyethylene, (HMPE)". Based on this, it's the same basic material but once again, there are many grades available. The Wiki article points out a few interesting things, lack of heat resistance being one. The addition of 17% Vectran is to eliminate this weakness. The high end versions of UHMWPE/HMPE have come along way in the past few years with regard to creep resistance (I'm talking SK75 & SK90) but that little bit of Vectran can't hurt. 

Another factor to consider with a small diameter material is wax content. The smaller the diameter of the material the more wax there is between the strands. This can mimic string creep but in most cases it's the wax being displaced and is not actually material creep. I found that with early spools of 8190 I had to burnish most of the wax out to eliminate the problem. I now order low wax with any small diameter material and have had zero issues.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I've read that Fury is 100% SK90 Dyneema like 8190 however because of how they weave the material to make the strand, they have a smaller diameter with less stretch to it.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Is sk 90 the highest grade dyneema you can get?


----------



## coatimundi01 (Oct 18, 2013)

Just a thought: if the sun fades these materials, then how come there isn't a string wax with a UV shield in it? Or maybe there already is and I just don't know about it...


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

Both BCY X and Fury are great materials. I build with both daily and prefer Fury over X. I've never received a spool of Fury that I had to send back due to strand separation, I've had several spools of X that have had issues. BCY has always taken care of the problem but it's still frustrating. The only downside I see to Fury is that it takes longer to stretch but I've also stretched it for 1.5 hours and haven't had any reports of stretch from the people testing it for me. I try to build all of my X sets throughout the day and let the Fury sets stretch overnight simply because something needs to be on the stretchers overnight, it might as well be the material that does take longer to stretch. Attention to detail and a desire to produce a quality string every time regardless of how many sets you turn out that day are more important to me.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

Huntinsker said:


> I've read that Fury is 100% SK90 Dyneema like 8190 however because of how they weave the material to make the strand, they have a smaller diameter with less stretch to it.


I do believe it's been mentioned that is at sk90 level. Couple other points that I remember from past treads. Brownell has multiple suppliers which is one reason the just call it uhwmpe (there are various grades that fall under that title) and also when they run it through there process to enhance it they can't/won't use the original make-up name. 

Fury is here to stay just taking longer due to past material complaints with Brownell. It's definitely my preferred material and there consistency can't be denied. IMO BCY has there own issues/mishaps, with that much volume it'd be impossible not to; however, a lot of it doesn't get aired in the open forums....

I'm thankful for a couple different companies. I like Brownell string materials and BCY servings. Need to double check my excel tables for me it's cheaper or very comparable cost wise with X or Fury.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> Is sk 90 the highest grade dyneema you can get?


It is the best that I'm aware of.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

UHMWPE is the same material make up of DYNEEMA. Dyneema is just a branded name for the product. FURY is not a skinnier version of Rhino, you can see that in the build process alone. FURY is a higher grade of material (sk90). As stated before we do not use only 1 supplier for our HMPE / UHMWPE so we are not permitted to use the Dyneema name. The fury and rhino both perform great and have proven themselves in applications, so we are not too bent out of shape about not using a brand name. Brownell has offered quality products to the industry and we will continue to keep innovating! Please let me know if you have any other questions! Thanks guys!





bryanroberts said:


> I noticed on brownell website that fury and I think rhino were 100% UHMWPE. Does that mean the only difference between those two is strand size and wax? I am just wondering. I am still in string materials and their meaning 101. I haven't seen a definition of what that material is unless it's a trade secret? Anyway I figured someone on here would know.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

Has any one else done an actual cost breakdown of materials per string?

Would be interested to compare my information as I actually have Fury cheaper per string, not much .20 to .40 per string depending on strand count ect. even though on the surface it "Costs" more per 1/4#


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Brownell said:


> UHMWPE is the same material make up of DYNEEMA. Dyneema is just a branded name for the product. FURY is not a skinnier version of Rhino, you can see that in the build process alone. FURY is a higher grade of material (sk90). As stated before we do not use only 1 supplier for our HMPE / UHMWPE so we are not permitted to use the Dyneema name. The fury and rhino both perform great and have proven themselves in applications, so we are not too bent out of shape about not using a brand name. Brownell has offered quality products to the industry and we will continue to keep innovating! Please let me know if you have any other questions! Thanks guys!


Thanks for clearing that up. Many detractors of your products seem to think that you're unwilling to divulge what your materials are made from. Seems pretty clear to me. Dyneema is a trademarked brand name for UHMWPE. BCY calls it Dyneema because they only use that one branded supplier. You guys call it UHMWPE because you don't use that brand exclusively so you call it by it's actual name instead of a trademarked name.

So basically all the people accusing Brownell of hiding what their materials are made of are just misunderstanding based on industry names vs trademarked names for the same material.


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

It can't be more than a dollar one way or the other. String material is cheap per string set when you break it out. Serving is much more expensive (usually double) with labor being the big cost in the whole equation.


----------



## skynight (Nov 5, 2003)

I read all these threads, and two claims just never make sense to me.
1) How can the cost per string be the same with a 15% price differential? Are fury strings 15% lighter or something?

2) How can a material that takes far more time to stretch be more stable?


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

skynight said:


> I read all these threads, and two claims just never make sense to me.
> 1) How can the cost per string be the same with a 15% price differential? Are fury strings 15% lighter or something?
> 
> 2) How can a material that takes far more time to stretch be more stable?


I am no expert at this at all. my thinking or opinion is if it's harder to stretch or takes more time wouldn't that be what you wanted on your bow? A material that is resistant to stretching?


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

Here's some numbers per Lancaster Pricing 

Fury 3160 ft per 1/4#, @ 62.99 = $0.01993 per foot
BCY X 2375ft per 1/4# @ 54.99 = $0.02315 per foot

Average single cam string
88" Fury = 205' at 28 strands = $4.08
X = 176' at 24 strands = $4.07

Average single cam buss 
32" Fury = 85' at 32 strands = $1.69
X = 64' at 24 strands = $1.48

IMO material cost should be none issue between the two. It really comes down to time. That's where most of the cost is in strings.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

retrieverfishin said:


> It can't be more than a dollar one way or the other. String material is cheap per string set when you break it out. Serving is much more expensive (usually double) with labor being the big cost in the whole equation.


I used some of Deezlin's (I think) feet of serving per inch of actual serving ratios and my calculations (including shipping and exchange to canada) came to about the same for serving and string material. Going from twisted to braided serving was just over double to halo and just under triple to bullwhip


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Thank you for telling me what material is used for making Fury. I was really upset that I could not find out what material was used in the brownell products. I now feel like I can make an educated decision when I decide to use your products.



Brownell said:


> UHMWPE is the same material make up of DYNEEMA. Dyneema is just a branded name for the product. FURY is not a skinnier version of Rhino, you can see that in the build process alone. FURY is a higher grade of material (sk90). As stated before we do not use only 1 supplier for our HMPE / UHMWPE so we are not permitted to use the Dyneema name. The fury and rhino both perform great and have proven themselves in applications, so we are not too bent out of shape about not using a brand name. Brownell has offered quality products to the industry and we will continue to keep innovating! Please let me know if you have any other questions! Thanks guys!


----------



## skynight (Nov 5, 2003)

bryanroberts said:


> I am no expert at this at all. my thinking or opinion is if it's harder to stretch or takes more time wouldn't that be what you wanted on your bow? A material that is resistant to stretching?


Taking longer to stretch means the amount of time until it stops stretching, so your looking at it backward.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

skynight said:


> Taking longer to stretch means the amount of time until it stops stretching, so your looking at it backward.


okay.. thanks..


----------



## 3SixtyOutdoors (Sep 14, 2012)

I have built with them both 99% x and I built only one set of my personal strings in fury.

Im thinking of ordering more fury and give it another try. I will say the strings look much better in fury very smooth and very bright colors.

Ill build another set after asa ky and shoot them until vegas season prep see how it goes


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

3SixtyOutdoors said:


> I have built with them both 99% x and I built only one set of my personal strings in fury.
> 
> Im thinking of ordering more fury and give it another try. I will say the strings look much better in fury very smooth and very bright colors.
> 
> Ill build another set after asa ky and shoot them until vegas season prep see how it goes


There is no doubt that fury finishes great. Looks wise it makes the best string I have made or seen. The performance on the bow compared to bcy x is what I am interested in finding out so I am looking forward to your findings.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Based on the information given I guess you could assume they are the same material but who knows? These are just acronyms that cover a very large umbrella and there are many grades of these very generic acronyms.
> 
> Here's a link from Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-high-molecular-weight_polyethylene
> 
> ...


I personally don't care if a material is made out of cheese if it outperforms everything else  BCY has pushed "SK90" "SK75" etc down everyone's throats for years and thats all many people understand. Those are basically just grades of Dyneema brand. But does anyone actually know what this grading scale means? One may be more elastic than the other, one may have greater creep resistance, one may have higher break strength, etc. Why be concerned about the material makeup. Why not just test it and see how it works.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> I personally don't care if a material is made out of cheese if it outperforms everything else  BCY has pushed "SK90" "SK75" etc down everyone's throats for years and thats all many people understand. Those are basically just grades of Dyneema brand. But does anyone actually know what this grading scale means? One may be more elastic than the other, one may have greater creep resistance, one may have higher break strength, etc. Why be concerned about the material makeup. Why not just test it and see how it works.


x2!


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I may not know everything about sk90. I do think that if 2 string materials are made from sk90 that I can expect similar performance from both materials. Also I don't have to guess if one company is using pixie dust on their string materials. 

Why not inform the customer and then let the customer make the best decision for which material that they want to use for their string?


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

jim p said:


> I may not know everything about sk90. I do think that if 2 string materials are made from sk90 that I can expect similar performance from both materials. Also I don't have to guess if one company is using pixie dust on their string materials.
> 
> Why not inform the customer and then let the customer make the best decision for which material that they want to use for their string?


Its not the same though. One is made by DSM for BCY and the other is built in house at Brownell with the raw SK90 fibers. They are much different side by side and performance is different as well. The fiber grade does not tell you about the fiber size and how its woven into the strands.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

I would be concerned with not knowing what I was using if it was a brand new material that know one knew anything about and had not been evaluated. If the material performs at a top level I could care less if it was made out of cat gut and it wouldn't matter if I knew it was or not. JMO


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> I would be concerned with not knowing what I was using if it was a brand new material that know one knew anything about and had not been evaluated. If the material performs at a top level I could care less if it was made out of cat gut and it wouldn't matter if I knew it was or not. JMO


Yep. X is X. 8190 is 8190. Fury is Fury. No matter what its made from we know how they all hold up and shoot.


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

Well, I have an order in for some fury. I will give it a fair shake on one of my personal bows.


----------



## 138104 (May 14, 2009)

retrieverfishin said:


> Well, I have an order in for some fury. I will give it a fair shake on one of my personal bows.


Looking forward to your review as I know you'll tell it like it is.

I would be happy to do field testing for you too.


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

skynight said:


> I read all these threads, and two claims just never make sense to me.
> *1) How can the cost per string be the same with a 15% price differential?* Are fury strings 15% lighter or something?
> 
> *2) How can a material that takes far more time to stretch be more stable?*


Cost is time required to stretch to get the Fury material to reach creep free state.

A material that takes more time to stretch creeps slower and less (a good thing for string/cable). The true test is durability and creep free state.

Try them and you make your own opinion.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> I personally don't care if a material is made out of cheese if it outperforms everything else  BCY has pushed "SK90" "SK75" etc down everyone's throats for years and thats all many people understand. Those are basically just grades of Dyneema brand. But does anyone actually know what this grading scale means? One may be more elastic than the other, one may have greater creep resistance, one may have higher break strength, etc. Why be concerned about the material makeup. Why not just test it and see how it works.


Can you truly claim an unbiased opinion as a "Brownell bowstring products distributor"? I think not.


----------



## Boilermaker2 (Feb 10, 2008)

EPLC said:


> Can you truly claim an unbiased opinion as a "Brownell bowstring products distributor"? I think not.


Actually he can. Just because your a distributor for someone, dosnt mean you can't say anything good about another company. There has to be something good to say about a particular material first.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Can you truly claim an unbiased opinion as a "Brownell bowstring products distributor"? I think not.


I built a ton with BCY 452x, Trophy, 8190, X. Also a ton with brownell Xcel, XS2, Rhino and Fury. I have a pretty good handle from personal experience on the qualities of every popular material. I have used them all. I never claimed X is a bad material. Quite the contrary. I would never have built and sold strings with it if i thought it was bad. But, unlike you apparantly, i have used and installed BOTH X and fury materials extensively. I have never had a Fury or X string budge. Both are better than all past materials. I chose to stop carrying X material long before i started distributing for Brownell. I usually got better performance and always had a final product that better meets my quality standard with Fury. More and more people are switching to Fury for a good reason. Its incredible material. Try it out and see for yourself.


----------



## AUSSIEDUDE (Apr 17, 2009)

EPLC said:


> Can you truly claim an unbiased opinion as a "Brownell bowstring products distributor"? I think not.


Ray may be a Brownell products distributor but in this case his comments are spot on. I will not be selling off my X material as it makes a great string but the differences that Ray mentions are 100% correct.
Fury does make a better looking string though there is nothing shabby about a good X string either.
Fury does look to be more consistent on the spool compared to X
Fury does take a lot longer to stretch than X yet stretches less. 
One minor disadvantage that I found with Fury was the need to serve center servings extremely tightly to avoid separation, probably a result of the smoothness of the material. Not a real problem just something you need to be aware of.
To me the decision is whether or not Fury is worth the extra price they charge for it and for me it is probably not. I doubt if the majority of archers could notice any difference in shooting the two strings and I think it is too early to tell if Fury will outlast X though indications are that it may.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

Fury gets my vote


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

EPLC said:


> Can you truly claim an unbiased opinion as a "Brownell bowstring products distributor"? I think not.


The only opinion that count is your personal opinion. The only way to have an unbiased opinion is to try and test it over time. 

BCY makes awesome string materials and so does Brownell.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Brownell said:


> UHMWPE is the same material make up of DYNEEMA. Dyneema is just a branded name for the product. FURY is not a skinnier version of Rhino, you can see that in the build process alone. FURY is a higher grade of material (sk90). As stated before we do not use only 1 supplier for our HMPE / UHMWPE so we are not permitted to use the Dyneema name. The fury and rhino both perform great and have proven themselves in applications, so we are not too bent out of shape about not using a brand name. Brownell has offered quality products to the industry and we will continue to keep innovating! Please let me know if you have any other questions! Thanks guys!


thanks for the explanation Rob!


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Ray knight said:


> Its not the same though. One is made by DSM for BCY and the other is built in house at Brownell with the raw SK90 fibers. They are much different side by side and performance is different as well. The fiber grade does not tell you about the fiber size and how its woven into the strands.[/QUOTE
> 
> You have a very good point. Maybe some day the manufactures will provide even more information about their products explaining why a certain technique is better than another when it comes to making strands by weaving the different size raw fibers together.
> 
> ...


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> I built a ton with BCY 452x, Trophy, 8190, X. Also a ton with brownell Xcel, XS2, Rhino and Fury. I have a pretty good handle from personal experience on the qualities of every popular material. I have used them all. I never claimed X is a bad material. Quite the contrary. I would never have built and sold strings with it if i thought it was bad. But, unlike you apparantly, i have used and installed BOTH X and fury materials extensively. I have never had a Fury or X string budge. Both are better than all past materials. I chose to stop carrying X material long before i started distributing for Brownell. I usually got better performance and always had a final product that better meets my quality standard with Fury. More and more people are switching to Fury for a good reason. Its incredible material. Try it out and see for yourself.


Long before? The BCY-X material hasn't even been out for a year. And you forgot to mention Astroflight, another "better than" product that seems to have lost it's popularity. The claims are always the same yet the materials keep coming and going. Meanwhile, the BCY products continue to be the longest lasting product line on the market... and the most popular from bow companies to the backyard shooter. The test of time tells the real story and history continually repeats itself over and over. While I'm sure Brownell makes fine archery products, the continual claims of "better than" just haven't proven themselves out. BCY should feel flattered that their products are the ones that are always compared to as the standard... and mimicked.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Long before? The BCY-X material hasn't even been out for a year. And you forgot to mention Astroflight, another "better than" product that seems to have lost it's popularity. The claims are always the same yet the materials keep coming and going. Meanwhile, the BCY products continue to be the longest lasting product line on the market... and the most popular from bow companies to the backyard shooter. The test of time tells the real story and history continually repeats itself over and over. While I'm sure Brownell makes fine archery products, the continual claims of "better than" just haven't proven themselves out. BCY should feel flattered that their products are the ones that are always compared to as the standard... and mimicked.


Have you used Fury? Have you built with or shot a bow with Fury strings? Have you compared it side by side? If i were to guess, you have never even handled the material. Its obvious you will write off every Brownell material without testing it. I never liked Astroflight either. I liked X material. I liked Fury better. I have built hundreds of sets with each material. You have apparantly only used BCY products. If a new BCY material comes out i'll test that too and it may be better than Fury. I have no reason to write anything off without fully testing it. Do you do the same or do you have the BCY logo tattooed on your arm? Test both and see for yourself.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

EPLC said:


> Long before? The BCY-X material hasn't even been out for a year. And you forgot to mention Astroflight, another "better than" product that seems to have lost it's popularity. The claims are always the same yet the materials keep coming and going. Meanwhile, the BCY products continue to be the longest lasting product line on the market... and the most popular from bow companies to the backyard shooter. The test of time tells the real story and history continually repeats itself over and over. While I'm sure Brownell makes fine archery products, the continual claims of "better than" just haven't proven themselves out. BCY should feel flattered that their products are the ones that are always compared to as the standard... and mimicked.


Hopefully someday BCY will mimic Brownells consistency Not sure how much you have actually used Brownell product...?based on your bashing and pumping up BCY guessing not much...


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> Have you used Fury? Have you built with or shot a bow with Fury strings? Have you compared it side by side? If i were to guess, you have never even handled the material. Its obvious you will write off every Brownell material without testing it. I never liked Astroflight either. I liked X material. I liked Fury better. I have built hundreds of sets with each material. You have apparantly only used BCY products. If a new BCY material comes out i'll test that too and it may be better than Fury. I have no reason to write anything off without fully testing it. Do you do the same or do you have the BCY logo tattooed on your arm? Test both and see for yourself.


No, I haven't but I did try and test AstroFlight which at the time was being pitched with the very same claims. I wasn't impressed but of course your results may vary... And BTW I have no financial connection to BCY... and no tattoos. The story is always the same; BCY introduces a new product and it is followed sometime later by Brownell's "better" version. You mentioned Fury as an example. Isn't Fury Brownell's answer to BCY's 8190 and BCY-X? This isn't saying Fury is a bad material as I'm sure it isn't. One thing I think we can all agree on; competition is a good thing and no matter which brand you choose, or think is better, the modern string materials produced today are much better as a result of this competition. Aren't we lucky.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

EPLC said:


> No, I haven't but I did try and test AstroFlight which at the time was being pitched with the very same claims. Of course your results may vary... And I have no financial connection to BCY... and no tattoos. Once again, by using BCY as the baseline for all comparisons you've acknowledged who is at the top of the food chain. The story is always the same; BCY introduces a new product and it is followed sometime later by Brownell's "better" version. You mentioned Fury as an example. Isn't Fury Brownell's answer to BCY's 8190? This isn't saying Fury is a bad material as I'm sure it isn't. One thing I think we can all agree on; competition is a good thing and no matter which brand you choose, or think is better, the modern string materials produced today are much better as a result of this competition. Aren't we lucky.


There is no doubt, in my mind, that bcy x and fury are better than anything before them. Just my opinion though.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> No, I haven't but I did try and test AstroFlight which at the time was being pitched with the very same claims. I wasn't impressed but of course your results may vary... And BTW I have no financial connection to BCY... and no tattoos. The story is always the same; BCY introduces a new product and it is followed sometime later by Brownell's "better" version. You mentioned Fury as an example. Isn't Fury Brownell's answer to BCY's 8190 and BCY-X? This isn't saying Fury is a bad material as I'm sure it isn't. One thing I think we can all agree on; competition is a good thing and no matter which brand you choose, or think is better, the modern string materials produced today are much better as a result of this competition. Aren't we lucky.


Yep. Competition gets us all better products! Fury AND X are wiping the floor of any previous materials. Both awesome. Never liked Astroflight personally. Fury is miles ahead of that material. But Astroflight definately opened the door to the more modern materials. It had its issues but ultimately helped the industry by increasing competition.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Have any of you builders made two sets, one fury and one x, and shot them on the same bow and compared results? If yes what were the results?


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> Have any of you builders made two sets, one fury and one x, and shot them on the same bow and compared results? If yes what were the results?


I made an identical string with X, Fury, XS2, Xcel, 452, 8190 and rhino. Speeds were not far off between all materials. 30 shots on each to compare speed. Fury made the highest average speed and was dead consistent. 8190 actually made 2fps faster speed on one shot but was not consistent. Some shots were slower than all others and some were way fast. All over the place by 4-6fps difference per shot. 452x and Xcel were pretty similar as expected. Xcel was a touch faster, 452x was a touch more consistant. Tie between those 2. Both good. Both 3-4fps slower than Fury, XS2 and 8190. XS2 performed really well. Very consistant and nearly as fast as 8190 despite it was a little thicker string with both being 24 strands and XS2 is a slightly larger material. XS2 i had some durability concerns with. Fuzz mostly. 8190 was more durable, XS2 more consistant performance. Rhino was 18 strands so thicker than all others. I should have done 16 strands to match 24 strand 8190 size but it was 1fps faster than Xcel which was 1fps faster than 452x. Rhino was by far the softest shot feel and the quietest by a good margin. Also Rhino is stronger and more durable than any other material tested. Its huge strand material. Rhino was pretty consistant considering how soft the shot feel is. 0-1fps difference per shot. I still use this material quite a bit. Its really perfect for hunting bows. Fury made the top speed, durability is second to Rhino, shot feel is medium. Harder than Rhino, XS2 and 8190 yet softer than X, 452X and Xcel. BCY-X made just under 1fps less speed than XS2 which is pretty impressive. It was also very consistant shot to shot varying only 0-2fps. Best of the vectran blends for speed. Of all those materials i ended up sticking with Rhino due to its nearly silent shot, soft shot feel, crazy break strength, highest durability and better than average speeds. My top choice for hunting bows and i still like using rhino on DST cables as i can go tiny with 16 strands yet have all the strength of a 24 strand Xcel or 452x cable. So a smaller bundle makes for more fine adjustment. Each twist moves less so you can really fine tune. I prefer Fury for target, 3D and for hunters wanting to get every last fps. Fury builds a super consistant and stable string and makes the highest speeds in most cases. Also it looks really good! Nothing looked as good as XS2 but Fury and Rhino are a close tie for second. So as i mentioned many times, X is an awesome material. I just don't have a use for it when Fury is just as stable and consistant but looks better, builds easier and usually makes more speed and Rhino serves a different purpose that vectran blends just cannot match. Durability, silence, soft shot feel. All most ideal for hunting. So yes, i have properly tested them all. All white strings with exact same size servings, same colors, no speed nocks, etc. Test bow was a contender elite with XT3000 limbs, GTX cams at 32" DL. Shorter parallel limb bows have just about 75 percent of the strings served so there would likely be less variance between speeds. I tested with a long ATA bow with servings just to the end of the cam tracks to get a wider spread on test results.


----------



## dparadowski (Sep 27, 2009)

Think we need a bit more information to be sure 😀


----------



## PAKraig (Sep 19, 2005)

So Rhino cables and Fury string. Got it:wink:


----------



## bugeaterNE (Apr 8, 2009)

Ray knight said:


> I made an identical string with X, Fury, XS2, Xcel, 452, 8190 and rhino. Speeds were not far off between all materials.
> 
> Thanks for the write up...Lots of good info here.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> I made an identical string with X, Fury, XS2, Xcel, 452, 8190 and rhino. Speeds were not far off between all materials. 30 shots on each to compare speed. Fury made the highest average speed and was dead consistent. 8190 actually made 2fps faster speed on one shot but was not consistent. Some shots were slower than all others and some were way fast. All over the place by 4-6fps difference per shot. 452x and Xcel were pretty similar as expected. Xcel was a touch faster, 452x was a touch more consistant. Tie between those 2. Both good. Both 3-4fps slower than Fury, XS2 and 8190. XS2 performed really well. Very consistant and nearly as fast as 8190 despite it was a little thicker string with both being 24 strands and XS2 is a slightly larger material. XS2 i had some durability concerns with. Fuzz mostly. 8190 was more durable, XS2 more consistant performance. Rhino was 18 strands so thicker than all others. I should have done 16 strands to match 24 strand 8190 size but it was 1fps faster than Xcel which was 1fps faster than 452x. Rhino was by far the softest shot feel and the quietest by a good margin. Also Rhino is stronger and more durable than any other material tested. Its huge strand material. Rhino was pretty consistant considering how soft the shot feel is. 0-1fps difference per shot. I still use this material quite a bit. Its really perfect for hunting bows. Fury made the top speed, durability is second to Rhino, shot feel is medium. Harder than Rhino, XS2 and 8190 yet softer than X, 452X and Xcel. BCY-X made just under 1fps less speed than XS2 which is pretty impressive. It was also very consistant shot to shot varying only 0-2fps. Best of the vectran blends for speed. Of all those materials i ended up sticking with Rhino due to its nearly silent shot, soft shot feel, crazy break strength, highest durability and better than average speeds. My top choice for hunting bows and i still like using rhino on DST cables as i can go tiny with 16 strands yet have all the strength of a 24 strand Xcel or 452x cable. So a smaller bundle makes for more fine adjustment. Each twist moves less so you can really fine tune. I prefer Fury for target, 3D and for hunters wanting to get every last fps. Fury builds a super consistant and stable string and makes the highest speeds in most cases. Also it looks really good! Nothing looked as good as XS2 but Fury and Rhino are a close tie for second. So as i mentioned many times, X is an awesome material. I just don't have a use for it when Fury is just as stable and consistant but looks better, builds easier and usually makes more speed and Rhino serves a different purpose that vectran blends just cannot match. Durability, silence, soft shot feel. All most ideal for hunting. So yes, i have properly tested them all. All white strings with exact same size servings, same colors, no speed nocks, etc. Test bow was a contender elite with XT3000 limbs, GTX cams at 32" DL. Shorter parallel limb bows have just about 75 percent of the strings served so there would likely be less variance between speeds. I tested with a long ATA bow with servings just to the end of the cam tracks to get a wider spread on test results.


Thanks Ray! Great info and exactly the info I was interested in.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> Thanks Ray! Great info and exactly the info I was interested in.


No problem. Sorry for the wall of text!


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

While all of this was very impressive, 1-2 fps means absolutely nothing as it can be the result of any slight variance in the build process. I also get the impression that you choice in the number of strands was somewhat subjective. For example: 18 strands of Rino "will" produce a softer, quieter shot as a result of the extra strands. This kind of reminds me of the Wells report; if you have a result and set out to prove it, you will. When any result favors BCY you interject personal opinion, weighted to discount the results and favor the other. I'm also not finding the inconsistency in speed you claim with 8190, in fact my findings are quite different as this material is very consistent.


----------



## Praeger (Jan 7, 2011)

EPLC said:


> While all of this was very impressive, 1-2 fps means absolutely nothing as it can be the result of any slight variance in the build process. I also get the impression that you choice in the number of strands was somewhat subjective. For example: 18 strands of Rino "will" produce a softer, quieter shot as a result of the extra strands. This kind of reminds me of the Wells report; if you have a result and set out to prove it, you will. When any result favors BCY you interject personal opinion, weighted to discount the results and favor the other. I'm also not finding the inconsistency in speed you claim with 8190, in fact my findings are quite different as this material is very consistent.


EPLC, you need to back off and take a breath. Your incessant attacks on Ray's postings by questioning his motives are totally unsupported. He reported the results from his personal experience building the strings, and shooting the strings. Some aspects of string performance _*are*_ subjective, and others such as shot speed and strand thickness can be expressed in empirical measurements. Your interpretation of the a 1-2 FPS difference between strings boarders on paranoia. I've lost track of how many times Ray has stated that BCY X is a high quality material and it comes down to what works best for the string builder's method. 

I for one, find Fury's "slickness" problematic relating to serving separation that I don't experience with BCY X. But I don't accuse every other string builder of misrepresenting Fury when they express their satisfaction with the product. I don't know what has injected such fanaticism in your reading of Ray's posts given your otherwise collegial contributions to this forum, but you are crossing a line here. If you've got something to say about the topic, say it, and leave innuendo on your side of the keyboard.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Ray, thanks for doing the test and providing the results.

Anytime that you want to tell me about the material building processes, I will be all ears. I am particularly interested in how fiber size and weave significantly affect the characteristics of a strand of sk90.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

jim p said:


> Ray, thanks for doing the test and providing the results.
> 
> Anytime that you want to tell me about the material building processes, I will be all ears. I am particularly interested in how fiber size and weave significantly affect the characteristics of a strand of sk90.


The material build process your guess is as good as mine! I've never been to the DSM factory or Brownell factory. How they actually do it is beyond me. They are most definately different though you can see and feel very different texture between the two.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> While all of this was very impressive, 1-2 fps means absolutely nothing as it can be the result of any slight variance in the build process. I also get the impression that you choice in the number of strands was somewhat subjective. For example: 18 strands of Rino "will" produce a softer, quieter shot as a result of the extra strands. This kind of reminds me of the Wells report; if you have a result and set out to prove it, you will. When any result favors BCY you interject personal opinion, weighted to discount the results and favor the other. I'm also not finding the inconsistency in speed you claim with 8190, in fact my findings are quite different as this material is very consistent.


Building with 18 strands of Rhino actually favored BCY. Since 16 and 18 strands Rhino is the difference of 24 and 28 strands of X. Look, i don't care what material you like or use. As i proved in my own tests, they are ALL good. You seem like you are passionate about your work and i respect that. I'm sure you turn out an awesome product. I spent many hours doing this testing. I used a fixed jig to make every string exactly the same length. I tried to keep everything as similar as possible. I used the same strand counts that i use when i build strings. 24 on everything except 18 Rhino and 28 Fury. Since Rhino is larger strand and Fury is smaller strand. 30 shots on each bow. And yes, 30 shots on 8190, recording every shot. It was not consistent. But still a few fps does not mean anything in the real world. 4-5fps is not going to make you miss the target. I just wanted to actually get some real data. I don't drink any kool-Aid man i test things for myself and make my decision based on my results. Also, 18 strands Rhino makes a HARDER shot than 16 strands.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> Building with 18 strands of Rhino actually favored BCY. Since 16 and 18 strands Rhino is the difference of 24 and 28 strands of X. Look, i don't care what material you like or use. As i proved in my own tests, they are ALL good. You seem like you are passionate about your work and i respect that. I'm sure you turn out an awesome product. I spent many hours doing this testing. I used a fixed jig to make every string exactly the same length. I tried to keep everything as similar as possible. I used the same strand counts that i use when i build strings. 24 on everything except 18 Rhino and 28 Fury. Since Rhino is larger strand and Fury is smaller strand. 30 shots on each bow. And yes, 30 shots on 8190, recording every shot. It was not consistent. But still a few fps does not mean anything in the real world. 4-5fps is not going to make you miss the target. I just wanted to actually get some real data. I don't drink any kool-Aid man i test things for myself and make my decision based on my results. Also, 18 strands Rhino makes a HARDER shot than 16 strands.


Every material is going to have its strong points and weakness. The only way to know if it will perform to your expectations is to either test it yourself or listen to the opinions of trusted respectable builders. I unfortunately don't have the extra money to order up several spools for testing purposes so I have to rely on others opinion. When it comes to info I tend to believe the ones that do not bad mouth a competitor. There is no reason for that and none of us want to hear it when football season hasn't even started yet. lol .. I thank Ray for his reports and look forward to the couple others reply when they finish the testing!


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Thanks again. I have never even seen 8190 and fury. I really like the look of fury and maybe some day I will have to build a string set and test it for myself.



Ray knight said:


> The material build process your guess is as good as mine! I've never been to the DSM factory or Brownell factory. How they actually do it is beyond me. They are most definately different though you can see and feel very different texture between the two.


----------



## Acts 10:13 (Aug 9, 2008)

Ray knight said:


> I have not seen any difference in fading between BCY and Brownell. Both flo greens will fade if left in the sun too long. Same with both flo orange. I have not seen any non-flo colors fade from either except BCY red which fades quite a bit. Brownell's Red has too much color (needs wiped down in build process), BCY's red does not have enough color (fades to pinkish)…toss up. No advantage to either in fading. Now as for shot feel, Fury has a touch softer shot feel, its quieter, makes higher arrow speed, is more durable in regards to fuzzing up, nobody can disagree that Fury makes a smoother, cleaner looking string with bolder color, it creeps less on stretchers and takes a LOT longer to stretch. On the bow it seems both are more than strong enough to hold against creep. No difference in creep on the bow just on stretchers, Fury is more flexible to work with because of the micro strand size. You can do 24,26,28,30,32,34 strands….. X is thicker so you can really choose 22,24,26,28 strands. Fury is more consistent from the manufacturer. Color is always the same, strand sizes are always the same, etc. Much faster customer service, faster shipping and less quality issues from Brownell. BCY-X does have vectran so in theory it should resist creep better in high heat. I have yet to see a Fury string set creep in high heat like we used to see with 8190. The vectran gives some peace of mind to ex-8190 users there. Until i hear about any case of Fury creeping in heat i will call it a tie with a slight advantage to BCY X for the added confidence of having a small amount of Vectran which is technically more heat stable.
> 
> The small strand size i would say is Fury's only real disadvantage (aside from slightly higher price) when its on the bow as it may be easier to cut a strand improperly installing a peep or using one of those titanium peeps.
> 
> Both materials perform extremely well. Both outperform all previous materials. Neither is bad but each has its advantages. Fury has more advantages than X so thats what i choose between the 2.


I am on my first set of Fury strings made by Hogwire as suggested by you Ray. I've been shooting the same set with your custom cable slide on my Matrix for over a year now - deer season, turkey season, indoor league, and now 3D. I have been very impressed with how well they have held up and how NOTHING has changed. The strings look as good as new in almost all places. There is some discoloration around the cable slide, the string stop, etc...basically all the contact points as could be expected. Most of my shooting buddies have commented on how nice the string set is. They all say how you can't even tell one thread from another unless you get up VERY close. They just look smooth as all get out. But they shoot even better.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

Rob at Hogwire makes a great set of strings


----------



## Acts 10:13 (Aug 9, 2008)

ontarget7 said:


> Rob at Hogwire makes a great set of strings


You are correct sir. I have shot winner's choice, 60x, vapor trail, etc. and I have worked on bow's and installed strings from a few local makers. I've actually only ever been disappointed in one set that I won't name here (local maker...and it had more to do with method rather than product...lack of attention to detail). I had great results with 60x and Vapor Trail. 

But I have personally won over a few buddies to Rob at Hogwire and his work. You can't beat ordering via a text...especially on custom lengths. And his threads are very, VERY well made.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> The material build process your guess is as good as mine! I've never been to the DSM factory or Brownell factory. How they actually do it is beyond me. They are most definately different though you can see and feel very different texture between the two.


Even though it's probably a trade secret I would love to see how it's made!


----------



## PAKraig (Sep 19, 2005)

bryanroberts said:


> Even though it's probably a trade secret I would love to see how it's made!


Nuclear spiders:embara:


----------



## bernies boy (Aug 1, 2010)

Ray Knight, I wonder if you could tell us your opinion of Astro Flight. From your description of Rhino, they sound very similar. And thanks for taking time to provide all the info that have already put out.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

bryanroberts said:


> Even though it's probably a trade secret I would love to see how it's made!



Even if it is a trade secret. There is probably an easy way to reverse engineer the product. It was discovered that a spider web increased in strength when the weight of the spider was applied as the web cured. This technique has been applied to making fibers stronger. 

All secrets will be revealed it just takes time for the hackers to get into the right files.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

bernies boy said:


> Ray Knight, I wonder if you could tell us your opinion of Astro Flight. From your description of Rhino, they sound very similar. And thanks for taking time to provide all the info that have already put out.


From my experience Astroflight was not very durable and not as resistant to creep as the newer materials. Rhino is a much stronger material. Both have similar strand size. Shot feel is similar. Astro may be a touch faster but Rhino more stable and MUCH more durable. I was never a fan of Astro personally but lots of people love it. I think anyone that liked Astro should switch to Rhino. Its similar in build process but much more durable and creep resistant.


----------



## hoyt em all (Feb 20, 2005)

is there any practical way to remove extra wax and color from a spool of thread before you wind around the post ? i have a spool of 8125 that is just nasty , black goo everywhere


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

hoyt em all said:


> is there any practical way to remove extra wax and color from a spool of thread before you wind around the post ? i have a spool of 8125 that is just nasty , black goo everywhere


I don't know a practical way but I've seen some pull red thread (fury) through a rag and completely wipe gobs of red off. It looked like there was a huge accident in the shop with 10 red towels on the bench..


----------



## nate0404 (Dec 7, 2013)

I am sold, my next string set will be Fury. Thanks EPLC for furthering the conversation, you sold me.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

hoyt em all said:


> is there any practical way to remove extra wax and color from a spool of thread before you wind around the post ? i have a spool of 8125 that is just nasty , black goo everywhere


Tie a knot with a spare strand of material really tight around the material you want to strip. Drag it behind while you wrap the posts and it will strip off the wax while you wrap the jig. Or if you have an ss600 serving machine you can spool some string material to a serving jig spool and strip it while it spools up. Many ways to do it but best to do it to the single strand.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> Tie a knot with a spare strand of material really tight around the material you want to strip. Drag it behind while you wrap the posts and it will strip off the wax while you wrap the jig. Or if you have an ss600 serving machine you can spool some string material to a serving jig spool and strip it while it spools up. Many ways to do it but best to do it to the single strand.


brownell red can get pretty bad too..Have they fixed it yet?


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

jim p said:


> Even if it is a trade secret. There is probably an easy way to reverse engineer the product. It was discovered that a spider web increased in strength when the weight of the spider was applied as the web cured. This technique has been applied to making fibers stronger.
> 
> All secrets will be revealed it just takes time for the hackers to get into the right files.


 or pissed off employee! lol


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> bcy x and fury. I have built sets of both, read info on both, heard facts and rumors on both, and now that they have been on bows for awhile I was wondering how the materials are performing on the bow. I know how good one finishes over the other and ones prices are better but I am looking for shooters opinion on these two materials. No bashing, just fact based personal experience. Thanks


Ok, back on topic: What we have is two similar materials separated by an added strand of Vectran in BCY-X. Actually, 8190 is probably a closer comparison to Fury because it has no Vectran. Of course this assumes (which was previously stated by 2 Brownell people) that Fury is SK90 as is BCY-X and 8190. Unlike Fury, BCY-X and 8190 both have an additional component added, BCY-X has Vectran and 8190 has Gore. Once again, "assuming" SK90 is the base for all 3, the smaller diameter of Fury would be solely due to the Vectran and Gore not being added to the SK90. So, if they are all SK90 then the main separator is the Vectran and the Gore. Remove them and from a base material standpoint they are the same. 

Ok, Fury has no Vectran and Fury has no Gore... Why does this matter, or does it even matter at all?

8190 with Gore: While Gore does not increase the stability of the material, it does provide a dry lubricant that reduces friction and lessons sound. I personally have some early 8190 without the Gore and some with. The Gore does seem to do what it is claimed to do... and that is to produce a quieter shot with better resistance to wear.

BCY-X with Vectran: Vectran added to any non-blended HMPE (or similar acronyms) will add to the stability and reduce the creep better than any process available so far. While some will argue this point, Tom (ex-wolverine) put up a great post in another thread addressing blended vs. non-blended materials. I took the liberty to link it here... great read -> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2474638&p=1073017141#post1073017141

BTW, I just called BCY and talked to Bob Destin. He asked me to post an open invitation to Ray Knight and Hogwire (or anyone else interested) to stop by the BCY factory next time they are in town as Brownell is not that far from BCY. I've had the tour myself a while back and I can assure you an interesting conversation.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I guess that I have not been keeping up. I thought 8190 was pure sk90. but now it is now blended with gore. Interesting.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

EPLC said:


> Ok, back on topic: What we have is two similar materials separated by an added strand of Vectran in BCY-X. Actually, 8190 is probably a closer comparison to Fury because it has no Vectran. Of course this assumes (which was previously stated by 2 Brownell people) that Fury is SK90 as is BCY-X and 8190. Unlike Fury, BCY-X and 8190 both have an additional component added, BCY-X has Vectran and 8190 has Gore. Once again, "assuming" SK90 is the base for all 3, the smaller diameter of Fury would be solely due to the Vectran and Gore not being added to the SK90. So, if they are all SK90 then the main separator is the Vectran and the Gore. Remove them and from a base material standpoint they are the same.
> 
> Ok, Fury has no Vectran and Fury has no Gore... Why does this matter, or does it even matter at all?
> 
> ...


I for one am not on the same level, not even the same building, as knight, hogwire, eplc, and other custom builders. but I think that stop at bcy would be pretty cool and worth the stop.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I just looked at BCY web page and they are showing 8190 as 100% sk90. 8125G is sk75 with 8% gore.

The website might be out of date.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Ok, back on topic: What we have is two similar materials separated by an added strand of Vectran in BCY-X. Actually, 8190 is probably a closer comparison to Fury because it has no Vectran. Of course this assumes (which was previously stated by 2 Brownell people) that Fury is SK90 as is BCY-X and 8190. Unlike Fury, BCY-X and 8190 both have an additional component added, BCY-X has Vectran and 8190 has Gore. Once again, "assuming" SK90 is the base for all 3, the smaller diameter of Fury would be solely due to the Vectran and Gore not being added to the SK90. So, if they are all SK90 then the main separator is the Vectran and the Gore. Remove them and from a base material standpoint they are the same.
> 
> Ok, Fury has no Vectran and Fury has no Gore... Why does this matter, or does it even matter at all?
> 
> ...


A walk through a factory would not change my own actual test results and preferences but would be cool. Tom (Ex-wolverine) is a very smart guy and knows a lot on a scientific level about materials strengths and weaknesses at their limits. He did a good write up explaining it. (He is a top string builder as well). Vectran blended materials are technically going to be more stable but at what limit? In the old days it was a drastic difference. Vectran was added to older materials because they NEEDED it to be stable. Those materials were not nearly as strong as today's materials. The "limit" was a lot lower than it is today. Brownell even had a material with over 50% vectran at one point years ago. It does add an additional margin of confidence but is it really needed with a material as strong and creep resistant as Fury has proven to be? Vectran's real advantage blended with today's high tech materials (in my opinion) is to stiffen up the shot, take out some of the "bounce" at the shot to allow easier tuning and more consistent shot to shot. It does also have a much higher melting point but realistically unless you are storing your bow in your black car in the desert sun or next to a campfire i doubt its really helping anything. Plenty of guys shooting Fury in high heat environments with no stretch or creep at all. If you took the amount of vectran (17%) in a 24 strand X string its only equal to 4 strands. How much difference can 4 strands actually make? So if you have an extra 4 strands of Dyneema replacing the 4 strands of Vectran, plus you add another 4-8 strands of Dyneema as we do with Fury because its smaller material, you get a super strong and creep resistant string.

On a side note, i am feeling like a total dork arguing about string material! lol. We both have better things to do. X is great material. If you love it, spin away with it! You won't have any problems. I'm sure you would love Fury if you tried it. I respect anyone who takes pride in their work no matter what material they use. I encourage every string builder to try them both and use the one you like best. There is really not a bad choice. It really comes down to a simple choice. Do you want a softer and quieter shot, a bit more speed and a smoother, rounder and cleaner looking string with less fuzz? (FURY) Or do you want a slightly firmer shot, slightly easier tuning and confidence of having vectran in your material? (X). I still say choose your string builder first. Quality work plays a bigger role than string material since they are both so much better than past materials. Leave it up to your trusted string builder to use whatever material they build best with and you will get the best possible product.


----------



## Sinister01 (Apr 20, 2009)

has it always been this way? it's like a ford vs. chevy thing reading some parts of this thread.
has it always been like this between brownell users and bcy users?


----------



## broadheadnut (Mar 3, 2011)

Yes, and a lot of it comes from the "i use it so it must be the best" mentality. Its not like bow companies where there are multiple manufacturers, there are 3 . Brownell, BCY and Angel.




Sinister01 said:


> has it always been this way? it's like a ford vs. chevy thing reading some parts of this thread.
> has it always been like this between brownell users and bcy users?


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Ok, back on topic: What we have is two similar materials separated by an added strand of Vectran in BCY-X. Actually, 8190 is probably a closer comparison to Fury because it has no Vectran. Of course this assumes (which was previously stated by 2 Brownell people) that Fury is SK90 as is BCY-X and 8190. Unlike Fury, BCY-X and 8190 both have an additional component added, BCY-X has Vectran and 8190 has Gore. *Once again, "assuming" SK90 is the base for all 3, the smaller diameter of Fury would be solely due to the Vectran and Gore not being added to the SK90.* So, if they are all SK90 then the main separator is the Vectran and the Gore. Remove them and from a base material standpoint they are the same.
> 
> Ok, Fury has no Vectran and Fury has no Gore... Why does this matter, or does it even matter at all?
> 
> ...


This is where I disagree. Just because something is made from the same base material, does not mean that it's the same. The way that base material is used and woven together can completely change the properties of the end product. Denim work jeans are made from the same type of cotton as light soft T-shirts but they feel, stretch, look and perform very differently.

If you were to get Fury and any of the BCY materials in your hands, you'd immediately see the difference. You can "assume" all you want but without seeing it, you won't know. It's easy to see when you have them in hand and, especially when working with them, that the weave that Brownell uses with Fury is much tighter than the weave that BCY uses on their materials. It's hard to explain but it's easy to see and feel.


----------



## hoyt em all (Feb 20, 2005)

All over the place by 4-6fps difference per shot.(8190)

Ray, what would cause that in your opinion ? may guess would be the stretch in a hybrid cam buss cable ,even though i have not seen that much speed difference in 8125


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

hoyt em all said:


> All over the place by 4-6fps difference per shot.(8190)
> 
> Ray, what would cause that in your opinion ? may guess would be the stretch in a hybrid cam buss cable ,even though i have not seen that much speed difference in 8125


Not sure honestly. Thats just what i recorded with that test string. All were shot with a shooting machine too to remove human error.


----------



## bows_-_arrows (Oct 19, 2010)

I've built with x since it came out and now on my fourth set of fury and I like how it builds better. Today I installed 28 strands fury and installed, no movement, peep is straight, speed has varied up or same on all 4 sets. So far I'm impressed with it. Used the bullwhip end serving.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> This is where I disagree. Just because something is made from the same base material, does not mean that it's the same. The way that base material is used and woven together can completely change the properties of the end product. Denim work jeans are made from the same type of cotton as light soft T-shirts but they feel, stretch, look and perform very differently.
> 
> If you were to get Fury and any of the BCY materials in your hands, you'd immediately see the difference. You can "assume" all you want but without seeing it, you won't know. It's easy to see when you have them in hand and, especially when working with them, that the weave that Brownell uses with Fury is much tighter than the weave that BCY uses on their materials. It's hard to explain but it's easy to see and feel.


First point, been there, done that. I've been making and testing strings for 15 or more years. Second: string material is not "weaved", it is twisted.


----------



## juspassinthru (Oct 8, 2006)

I made the move to fury and my current builder at reccomendation of Ray Knight aka Chris almost 2 years ago. Before it was 452x. And I just wasn't getting the results I wanted. Now, BCY is just an afterthought


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> *First point, been there, done that*. I've been making and testing strings for 15 or more years. Second: string material is not "weaved", it is twisted.


That's weird because you said in post #71 that you've never used Fury when Ray Knight asked you if you had. Even if you had gotten it in the last day or two, that wouldn't give you time to test it like we all have. 

Weaving, twisting, chewing it up and spitting it out, whatever you want to call it, it doesn't have to be done the same. Maybe Brownell braids it instead of twisting. If that were the case then it would be easy to see how it would be more stable than a twisted material. All I'm saying is that they're different so you can't "assume" that their the same based solely on the base material.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

EPLC said:


> Ok, back on topic: What we have is two similar materials separated by an added strand of Vectran in BCY-X. Actually, 8190 is probably a closer comparison to Fury because it has no Vectran. Of course this assumes (which was previously stated by 2 Brownell people) that Fury is SK90 as is BCY-X and 8190. Unlike Fury, BCY-X and 8190 both have an additional component added, BCY-X has Vectran and 8190 has Gore. Once again, "assuming" SK90 is the base for all 3, the smaller diameter of Fury would be solely due to the Vectran and Gore not being added to the SK90. So, if they are all SK90 then the main separator is the Vectran and the Gore. Remove them and from a base material standpoint they are the same.
> 
> Ok, Fury has no Vectran and Fury has no Gore... Why does this matter, or does it even matter at all?
> 
> ...


There needs to be some specifics established for any of this info to really mean anything.

Working tension of a bows cable system? Couple theories I have of heard are around 300#

What are the melting temperatures of Dyneema and Vectran? which would represent the high end/extreme that bows wouldn't see.

At what low end temperature that the material would start to exhibit signs of creep at say 300# of tension?

At what tension the material would creep at room temperature?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> That's weird because you said in post #71 that you've never used Fury when Ray Knight asked you if you had. Even if you had gotten it in the last day or two, that wouldn't give you time to test it like we all have.
> 
> Weaving, twisting, chewing it up and spitting it out, whatever you want to call it, it doesn't have to be done the same. Maybe Brownell braids it instead of twisting. If that were the case then it would be easy to see how it would be more stable than a twisted material. All I'm saying is that they're different so you can't "assume" that their the same based solely on the base material.


And I still haven't said I did. And string material is twisted, not woven or braided. 



Hoytalpha35 said:


> There needs to be some specifics established for any of this info to really mean anything.
> 
> Working tension of a bows cable system? Couple theories I have of heard are around 300#
> 
> ...


You mentioned cables. Almost any of the high end non-blended materials will hold up quite well in the string department. Cables are another story as they can be especially tough to eliminate creep. This is where the blended materials shine. Yes, they may not hold up cosmetically as well as the non-blended materials, but they won't move on you. I've also noticed that materials that have the least amount of fuzz tend to creep more than those that fuzz a tad. Non-blended materials have come a long way since the FastFlight days but they are still not quite as stable as the blended. Oh, and the room temperature thing: I guess it would depend on what temperature the room was set at?


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> And I still haven't said I did. And string material is twisted, not woven or braided.


So what does "First point, been there, done that. I've been making and testing strings for 15 or more years." mean then?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> So what does "First point, been there, done that. I've been making and testing strings for 15 or more years." mean then?


Means exactly what it says. Also, straight from the BCY Q&A page: 

Question: Are there any benefits in a braided bowstring as opposed to the standard twisted product?
Answer: We produced braided bowstring material many years ago and have looked at it many times. Generally braided material is expensive. It does not improve the creep characteristics of the bowstring and normally reduces arrow speed.


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

EPLC said:


> And I still haven't said I did. And string material is twisted, not woven or braided.
> 
> 
> 
> You mentioned cables. Almost any of the high end non-blended materials will hold up quite well in the string department. Cables are another story as they can be especially tough to eliminate creep. This is where the blended materials shine. Yes, they may not hold up cosmetically as well as the non-blended materials, but they won't move on you. *I've also noticed that materials that have the least amount of fuzz tend to creep more than those that fuzz a tad.* Non-blended materials have come a long way since the FastFlight days but they are still not quite as stable as the blended. Oh, and the room temperature thing: I guess it would depend on what temperature the room was set at?


Also noticed that the Fury has virtually no fuzz after thousands of shot and virtually no creep whatsoever. This is measured on a string jig under 100 lbs of tension.

Try it before you knock it.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

hoyt em all said:


> All over the place by 4-6fps difference per shot.(8190)
> 
> Ray, what would cause that in your opinion ? may guess would be the stretch in a hybrid cam buss cable ,even though i have not seen that much speed difference in 8125


From my findings it's always the first few shots that are the fastest. X seemed to be the same way when I was using it.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Means exactly what it says. Also, straight from the BCY Q&A page:
> 
> Question: Are there any benefits in a braided bowstring as opposed to the standard twisted product?
> Answer: We produced braided bowstring material many years ago and have looked at it many times. Generally braided material is expensive. It does not improve the creep characteristics of the bowstring and normally reduces arrow speed.


Okay so it means exactly what it says but what was the first point that you were referencing? I feel like you're being purposely vague and trying to deflect from the fact that you're arguing that Fury is some how inferior based on your assumptions of it even though you've never had it in your hands. It's like trying to argue with my sister when we were 13 years old. You just don't make sense and you're too deep to admit you don't know.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> There needs to be some specifics established for any of this info to really mean anything.
> 
> Working tension of a bows cable system? Couple theories I have of heard are around 300#
> 
> ...


All materials will creep a bit on stretchers. For example a 60" Fury will creep about 1/16-1/8" and it hits the wall. Wont go more than that at 400-500#. I actually got a touch more creep from X before on stretchers it hits the wall but these are just in building process. Once thats taken out both are super solid materials. Stretchers put way more tension on the cables and string than a bow can dish out. I don't think you will see Fury or X material have any creep on the bow so long as its built properly. BOTH materials, if NOT stretched to get out the creep, Will creep on the bow until they hit the wall we hit on the 300-500# stretchers. a 60" Fury string if just twisted and served will creep 1/16-1/8". a 60" X string if not stretched will creep about 1/8"-3/16". Stretching is a super important process and thats another good reason to choose your builder first and material second.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

ontarget7 said:


> From my findings it's always the first few shots that are the fastest. X seemed to be the same way when I was using it.


I've also seen and recorded the same thing with just about every material i tested. My guess it probably has to do with the serving breaking in and settling deeper into the cam grooves than the material itself. Who knows.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> I've also seen and recorded the same thing with just about every material i tested. My guess it probably has to do with the serving breaking in and settling deeper into the cam grooves than the material itself. Who knows.


Now that makes sense. Wax displacement can also be an issue, especially on the smaller diameter materials.


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> There needs to be some specifics established for any of this info to really mean anything.
> 
> Working tension of a bows cable system? Couple theories I have of heard are around 300#
> 
> ...


Dyneema melts between 144-152 c for you Northerners or 291-305F for us low landers 

Vectran melts at >400c or 752F depending on the method 

If you go to this link and look at the Data on Vectran go to the bottom of the page , product information , click on all the testing , read all the notes , you learn why BCY and Brownell added Vectran to Xcel and 452 to their HMPE 

http://www.vectranfiber.com

Once you get done reading and learning how and why Vectran makes and unblended product more stable you will understand that there is no way an unblended product , no matter who makes it, can be more stable than a Blended Product ...

If you read that and come out of it thinking otherwise, then there really isn't much more to say....

I will say if your stretching too much for too long and go past the time or higher poundage than the manufactures recommendations , your half lifeing the materials and breaking down the fibers 

Both Brownell and BCY recommend no more than 300lbs to get rid of creep ...
We all know what creep is right ? Basically strands settling or aligning them selves due to the wax....

I'm thinking that these two companies no more about fibers than we do...

Like I said in my opinion when it comes to fibers and stretching , more poundage is not better ...

But there will always be people who think they no more than the SMEs

As far as speed goes I see the opposite of every one ...the more I shoot the faster the chrono readings 

It only makes sense as we all know that when the string is elongated from the creep arrow speed increases ...i.e draw string/length increases so does arrow speed ...

I just don't see a shorter bow string being faster, in other words , I'm just not seeing a fresh bow string being faster than a shot in one...

Tom


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

ex-wolverine said:


> Dyneema melts between 144-152 c for you Northerners or 291-305F for us low landers
> 
> Vectran melts at >400c or 752F depending on the method
> 
> ...


Thanks Tom good info as always

Couple things I picked up from the website is that the Vectran is that it's is more durable/abrasion resistant and holds it's break strength better around bends than I thought. 

On the creep table would be curious how that translates to the diameters and strand counts of bowstrings. The table shows an ever increasing amount of creep at 30% of it's break strength = to 0.1% and 10,000 hours. But with blended materials your dealing with Dyneema in the equations as well. The 300# recommended by manufacturers obviously would be below this number and they would be sizing the 17% vectran in X to maintain that. 

IMO to get good stability out of hmpe it needs a better pre-stretch which is a self admission that I think Vectran is more stable. At the same time Fury has not shown stability concerns on the bow for me.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

Ray knight said:


> I've also seen and recorded the same thing with just about every material i tested. My guess it probably has to do with the serving breaking in and settling deeper into the cam grooves than the material itself. Who knows.


I don't find this to be the case with Fury built by Rob at Hogwire. My personal bows have not budged when I check speed


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

ontarget7 said:


> I don't find this to be the case with Fury built by Rob at Hogwire. My personal bows have not budged when I check speed


Rob does great work.


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

Ok guys, Ive read thru this several times, for a hunting set string/cables between Fury, BCY X and 8190 Extreme, made by either Winners Choice, 60x, Hogwire, or another suggestion, which is the better for that hunting application....Ive got 8190 extreme from WC now, it is 3 years old and has done me well, so whatever goes on I do want to last that long...are these other strings that much better ?..... Creep is always the main issue and absolutely no serving separations on ends or center, speed is a concern, as is lasting thru cold and wet situations and wear and tear so to speak..... What about serving materials ? Halo or 3D ? ..... This is for my Trusty '06 Allegiance ....I cant make a solid decision ..... so help me out guys ... if ya had to pick just one that will do it all ...


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

I like Meat said:


> Ok guys, Ive read thru this several times, for a hunting set string/cables between Fury, BCY X and 8190 Extreme, made by either Winners Choice, 60x, Hogwire, or another suggestion, which is the better for that hunting application....Ive got 8190 extreme from WC now, it is 3 years old and has done me well, so whatever goes on I do want to last that long...are these other strings that much better ?..... Creep is always the main issue and absolutely no serving separations on ends or center, speed is a concern, as is lasting thru cold and wet situations and wear and tear so to speak..... What about serving materials ? Halo or 3D ? ..... This is for my Trusty '06 Allegiance ....I cant make a solid decision ..... so help me out guys ... if ya had to pick just one that will do it all ...


I wouldn't cross out rhino either. I know Ray seems to think alot of it in a hunting application from what I have read.


----------



## Super 91 (Feb 28, 2006)

Fury from Hogwire for me, hands down. Just like the finish better. I think they are really close, apples to apples as far as the materials you listed, but from the few I have seen, Fury is hard to beat. Plus Rob does a meticulous job. Excellent craftsmanship.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

I like Meat said:


> Ok guys, Ive read thru this several times, for a hunting set string/cables between Fury, BCY X and 8190 Extreme, made by either Winners Choice, 60x, Hogwire, or another suggestion, which is the better for that hunting application....Ive got 8190 extreme from WC now, it is 3 years old and has done me well, so whatever goes on I do want to last that long...are these other strings that much better ?..... Creep is always the main issue and absolutely no serving separations on ends or center, speed is a concern, as is lasting thru cold and wet situations and wear and tear so to speak..... What about serving materials ? Halo or 3D ? ..... This is for my Trusty '06 Allegiance ....I cant make a solid decision ..... so help me out guys ... if ya had to pick just one that will do it all ...


For a Bowtech i'd suggest contacting Tony219er. He knows those bows best and makes really good strings. He uses both Fury and X material last i checked and he can advise which he thinks will work best with your bow.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> I wouldn't cross out rhino either. I know Ray seems to think alot of it in a hunting application from what I have read.


Rhino is really awesome for hunting bows. Super durable and crazy quiet. Not the fastest but not the slowest either. I would still suggest talking to Tony. Rhino in 16 strands may not be enough, 20 strands may be too thick. So Fury or x may work best on that bow.


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

How can I get hold of Tony219 and Hogwire...are they sponsors ? Hogwire was, is he still ? didnt see Hogwire on the list... what about 219 ?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

I like Meat said:


> Ok guys, Ive read thru this several times, for a hunting set string/cables between Fury, BCY X and 8190 Extreme, made by either Winners Choice, 60x, Hogwire, or another suggestion, which is the better for that hunting application....Ive got 8190 extreme from WC now, it is 3 years old and has done me well, so whatever goes on I do want to last that long...are these other strings that much better ?..... Creep is always the main issue and absolutely no serving separations on ends or center, speed is a concern, as is lasting thru cold and wet situations and wear and tear so to speak..... What about serving materials ? Halo or 3D ? ..... This is for my Trusty '06 Allegiance ....I cant make a solid decision ..... so help me out guys ... if ya had to pick just one that will do it all ...


I'm of the mind that if it isn't broken why fix it. Your WC set has done you well for the past 3 years, why change?


----------



## FookinScrappy (Dec 30, 2014)

I may have to have a fury set built for the rampage just cause it needs strings and i have bcy x on the spyder


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

EPLC said:


> I'm of the mind that if it isn't broken why fix it. Your WC set has done you well for the past 3 years, why change?


True, they make good strings/cables, Ive used 'em on both my BT's for quite a few years. Kinda pricey though...$99 for a set, more for a super custom set and all I use is tan and green, nothing special........60X is $75 I think, not sure on Hog and the Fury material......


----------



## GlennMac (Oct 21, 2006)

If your getting 3 years out of your strings paying an extra $25 shouldn't be an issue.


I like Meat said:


> True, they make good strings/cables, Ive used 'em on both my BT's for quite a few years. Kinda pricey though...$99 for a set, more for a super custom set and all I use is tan and green, nothing special........60X is $75 I think, not sure on Hog and the Fury material......


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> Thanks Tom good info as always
> 
> Couple things I picked up from the website is that the Vectran is that it's is more durable/abrasion resistant and holds it's break strength better around bends than I thought.
> 
> ...


That's a neat site with a lot of info


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

*BCY-X holds up*

Here's a set of BCY-X that has been on my bow for about two months. The bow is shot every day at our outdoor field course with an average of 100 arrows or more each day. I haven't touched the string and/or cables since the day I built them. Note the peep position and colors next to the original spools they were made from. I do not see how any material could look and/or perform better than BCY-X.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Here's a set of BCY-X that has been on my bow for about two months. The bow is shot every day at our outdoor field course with an average of 100 arrows or more each day. I haven't touched the string and/or cables since the day I built them. Note the peep position and colors next to the original spools they were made from. *I do not see how any material could look and/or perform better than BCY-X*.


That's because you haven't tried the better material yet. :wink: What I see in your picture is a nicely positioned peep, no doubt because of a stable string and cables, and then some fuzz and a rough looking string/cable surface. The bundles are not smooth and round and you can see every single strand individually.

Here is a string set made of Fury that's been on my bow since October 2014. I've been shooting this bow getting ready for some 900 rounds this summer so it's seen a lot of long range arrows, especially so in the last 2 months and has thousands of arrows on it already. You can see the perfect position of my peep and you can see that my string and cable are smooth and show no fuzz at all. You can also see where I had my peep marked but moved it up just a smidge haha. I also haven't waxed this string in 3 weeks.


----------



## pbuck (Mar 30, 2010)

Gotta admit, that Fury makes a slick looking string. Pun intended.


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

I'm liking that Fury material.....


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Huntinsker said:


> That's because you haven't tried the better material yet. :wink: What I see in your picture is a nicely positioned peep, no doubt because of a stable string and cables, and then some fuzz and a rough looking string/cable surface. The bundles are not smooth and round and you can see every single strand individually.
> 
> Here is a string set made of Fury that's been on my bow since October 2014. I've been shooting this bow getting ready for some 900 rounds this summer so it's seen a lot of long range arrows, especially so in the last 2 months and has thousands of arrows on it already. You can see the perfect position of my peep and you can see that my string and cable are smooth and show no fuzz at all. You can also see where I had my peep marked but moved it up just a smidge haha. I also haven't waxed this string in 3 weeks.
> 
> ...


whew! nuff said!!! Nothing on the market finishes or performs like fury!!


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Huntinsker said:


> That's because you haven't tried the better material yet. :wink: What I see in your picture is a nicely positioned peep, no doubt because of a stable string and cables, and then some fuzz and a rough looking string/cable surface. The bundles are not smooth and round and you can see every single strand individually.
> 
> Here is a string set made of Fury that's been on my bow since October 2014. I've been shooting this bow getting ready for some 900 rounds this summer so it's seen a lot of long range arrows, especially so in the last 2 months and has thousands of arrows on it already. You can see the perfect position of my peep and you can see that my string and cable are smooth and show no fuzz at all. You can also see where I had my peep marked but moved it up just a smidge haha. I also haven't waxed this string in 3 weeks.
> 
> ...


Thats a nice looking string! Great color combo. Fury strings look like wet glass rods with colors painted on them. XS2 actually looked even better. But not as good of material as Fury.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

The first thing people will refer to in regards to there strings not moving at all is, my peep hasn't moved. 

Hate to break this to you but that is a complete misconception to whether your strings have moved or not.

Cam synch when measured on a drawboard, at full draw tells the real story in stability on a set of strings.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

ontarget7 said:


> The first thing people will refer to in regards to there strings not moving at all is, my peep hasn't moved.
> 
> Hate to break this to you but that is a complete misconception to whether your strings have moved or not.
> 
> Cam synch when measured on a drawboard, at full draw tells the real story in stability on a set of strings.


Very true. I'm happy to report that my cam marks have not moved since installing this set either. After 9 months of hard shooting with 452x, I would usually have had to tweak a bit here and there. Not with the Fury sets I've built.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Well I was trying to reply to EPLC's post that told Ray Knight how good of a photographer he was for posting those last pics but I guess the post disappeared. Must be the update that made it disappear.

EPLC, I took those pics of my strings using my 2011 Droid Razr phone camera. I was holding the bow in my left hand and taking the picture with my right hand so it was a super high dollar setup.

You asked why no bow manufacturers are using Fury for their bows and the easy answer could be that they have contracts with BCY.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Great pictures Ray, not only re you a craftsman, but also a very talented photographer. There's no question your work from a visual standpoint is excellent! That said; why is it that after two years since its introduction there are no major bow companies using Fury, or any other straight HMPE material on anything but low end compounds, kids bows and recurves? just asking?
> 
> And BTW, those X strings have several thousand shots on them.


Those were Huntinsker's pics and strings. I can't take credit for those ones! On a manufacturer level, Those guys are buying truckloads of material. I'm SURE price point has pretty much everything to do with that. Compared to any other industry, Archery products probably have a lower margin than anything i can think of. I know Hoyt already uses a TON of Rhino material because they get great pricing on it and its less strands they need to build with - saves time - time is money. Why not? its good stuff. Through the grapevine i have heard a few companies will be using Fury next year as well. I think most manufacturers know these materials are close enough to take whatever they get the best price on. Most stock strings are poor build quality and most people switch them out right away anyways no matter what they are made from. Not much good reason for a manufacturer to spend more money on material there unless they are trying to get that last 2-3fps to beat a competitor's IBO ratings. No way to really get a proper honest answer on that one. Not like a big company would ever admit that they use something because its cheaper for them right? If i were buying that huge amount of material i know i would definitely be interested in getting the best deal i can. Especially because both are good materials. Its not like they are skimping on quality. For a stock string either X material or Fury material would be an upgrade over anything they used to use. If they get a few fps better speed on Fury and less fuzz with no difference in Creep is that worth potentially tens of thousands of dollars over X? My guess is most likely not. If they were priced the same i would bet we would see more Fury material on stock bows. It does also take a little more time to manufacture a string with more strands as well. If Brownell gets aggressive and can match the price BCY sells X material to manufacturers i have no doubt that more manufacturers will switch to Fury. I would never base my own decision on what material to use based on what a manufacturer's stock strings are made of. Its hard to find any custom string maker who does not make a better product than the mass produced quality mess that most bows come with stock. I think you, me and any of the string makers on this forum could make better strings out of dental floss than most manufacturers throw on their bows made from X or Fury.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

I was on my phone w/o my glasses and thought they were Ray's post/pictures  But Ray "is" a fine craftsman and a great photographer so I stand by that statement. I deleted the post after seeing my error. The content and point is still valid. NO major bow company is using a non-blended material on their compound bows... while there may be some exception for very low end stuff. As far as the pictures of the Fury strings vs the BCY-X it is obvious that the Fury strings, while they look slick, are the result of wax or some other substance filling in the gaps between the strands. I can create this look with just about any bowstring with a high wax or other substance burnished to look this way. I personally prefer a low wax material as it creates less issues with wax displacement. This is especially true for smaller diameter materials such as BCY-X and 8190 (and Fury, of course). 

And my strings have somewhere in the area of 5000 shots on them, give or take... and there has been no noticeable movement what so ever that I can tell from bow performance, marks, DL etc.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I was on my phone w/o my glasses and thought they were Ray's post/pictures  But Ray "is" a fine craftsman and a great photographer so I stand by that statement. I deleted the post after seeing my error. The content and point is still valid. NO major bow company is using a non-blended material on their compound bows... while there may be some exception for very low end stuff. As far as the pictures of the Fury strings vs the BCY-X it is obvious that the Fury strings, while they look slick, are the result of wax or some other substance filling in the gaps between the strands. I can create this look with just about any bowstring with a high wax or other substance burnished to look this way. I personally prefer a low wax material as it creates less issues with wax displacement. This is especially true for smaller diameter materials such as BCY-X and 8190 (and Fury, of course).
> 
> And my strings have somewhere in the area of 5000 shots on them, give or take... and there has been no noticeable movement what so ever that I can tell from bow performance, marks, DL etc.


Ah that explains it. I thought I was losing posts after the update. Some of my personal stuff has disappeared so I thought other people posts were too.

You can spin it whatever way you want, Fury makes a nicer looking string. The reason could be because the sky is blue and it still wouldn't matter. Fury makes a nicer looking string that so far in testing, is just as stable as X. IMO, if you can have all the stability and have better looks, why wouldn't you?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Ah that explains it. I thought I was losing posts after the update. Some of my personal stuff has disappeared so I thought other people posts were too.
> 
> You can spin it whatever way you want, Fury makes a nicer looking string. The reason could be because the sky is blue and it still wouldn't matter. Fury makes a nicer looking string that so far in testing, is just as stable as X. IMO, if you can have all the stability and have better looks, why wouldn't you?


...if your preference is an overly waxed string to the point where it fills in the gaps between the strands, that's your choice. I prefer a more natural look, but to each their own. My string has had thousands of shots in outdoor conditions with a shooter that is very hard on strings... and I haven't waxed them either. BTW, in an earlier post I said the most stable non-blended material I ever tested was SK75... I was mistaken as it was SK78, not SK75.


----------



## skynight (Nov 5, 2003)

I figure that fury looks advantage to be due simply to the smaller strand size. Its important, because it seems to be the deciding factor for so many.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> ...if your preference is an overly waxed string to the point where it fills in the gaps between the strands, that's your choice. I prefer a more natural look, but to each their own. My string has had thousands of shots in outdoor conditions with a shooter that is very hard on strings... and I haven't waxed them either. BTW, in an earlier post I said the most stable non-blended material I ever tested was SK75... I was mistaken as it was SK78, not SK75.


When I build my strings, I've gotten way more wax off of the BCY products that I use compared to Fury. I don't know how you'd know if Fury was so full of wax if you've never even had it in your hands. You seem to know an awful lot about something that you've never had any experience with.


----------



## Brownitsdown12 (Aug 26, 2012)

Can you guys post more pics of finished fury sets, I'm thinking about getting a set soon , thanks


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

I cannot wait to get some fury in my hands in the next couple of days so I can make my own call on this. Crazy.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> ...if your preference is an overly waxed string to the point where it fills in the gaps between the strands, that's your choice. I prefer a more natural look, but to each their own. My string has had thousands of shots in outdoor conditions with a shooter that is very hard on strings... and I haven't waxed them either. BTW, in an earlier post I said the most stable non-blended material I ever tested was SK75... I was mistaken as it was SK78, not SK75.


What material is Sk78? I think thats actually what Rhino is.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

skynight said:


> I figure that fury looks advantage to be due simply to the smaller strand size. Its important, because it seems to be the deciding factor for so many.


its not because of the small strands, or wax. its because the strands are made from smaller fibers. More of them. I've had some white Fury with just about no trace of wax at all and it still rounds up slick like that. I say its not the strand size because Rhino actually finishes even smoother than Fury. And XS2 even smoother than Rhino. Both of those have larger strand size. Fury gets very round without even burnishing it at all. One swipe and its smooth as glass. No need to burnish it much at all. I do a single slow swipe to get out excess wax from the bundle and i go slow as to not create heat. After that a super light coat of wax. There are no gaps in the bundle to collect dirt so that probably helps it stay so clean looking as well.


----------



## knarrly (Dec 21, 2004)

Lots of good technical info and personal results, as well as differing of opinions on which to use.

REad most of the thread and seems like there are no losers, both materials are solid and hardly any noticable difference in performance/stability. My take on it is x is a littlecheaper and fury looks a little better but take a bit more time to do properly.

For me if an x set is $10 cheaper from the same builder i'd go that way if only $5 i'd probably go with the fury.


----------



## JRHOADES20 (Jul 11, 2012)

How is serving seperation compare on Fury sets?


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

From an outsider to the manufacturing of bowstrings i get to look from a completely level playing field. One thing that i see and appreciate 
is that there is only a couple, one in particular, bowstring makers that have something positive to say about both companies newest materials. Others are going out of their way to try and make one companies newest product look bad and its just not working.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

bryanroberts said:


> From an outsider to the manufacturing of bowstrings i get to look from a completely level playing field. One thing that i see and appreciate
> is that there is only a couple, one in particular, bowstring makers that have something positive to say about both companies newest materials. Others are going out of their way to try and make one companies newest product look bad and its just not working.


I make bowstrings with both materials but it's a hobby not what I make a living doing.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

JRHOADES20 said:


> How is serving seperation compare on Fury sets?


If burnished smooth before serving i have seen more chance for separation. I suggest twist, stretch, serve, then burnish if you want. If you burnish individual colors first before twisting thats fine too. Give the serving something to grip.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> What material is Sk78? I think thats actually what Rhino is.


I don't know what Rhino is? SK78 is a DSM Dyneema material. It's very tough stuff. BCY used to call it Dynaflight 10 but changed the name to Force 10 and markets it (or did?) as a crossbow string material. I did some testing of SK78 a while abck and found it to be a very stable material, especially for a non-blend. I, quite frankly couldn't get it to move but it doesn't hold up as well cosmetically as SK90. I have some on my Dominator Max and my Supra that have been on for over a year. They don't look pretty anymore but they are still performing well. I've since switched my preference to X because it holds up better cosmetically. 8190 is an excellent material as well but in extreme conditions will move some on high poundage, high performance bows with long draws to contend with. My conclusion is that the less "fuzz" a material produces, the more it will tend to move. I can't back this up scientifically but this has become obvious to me over years of building with various materials. I believe this is due to the elasticity characteristics of the various materials. Those that have more ability to move tend to hold up better from a cosmetic perspective than those that have more creep resistance. Those that don't creep will tend to break down (read fuzz) over time but do not stretch/creep. Just an educated opinion. Vectran is the finest example of this as it does not move, but does break down over time. 100% Vectran will break in short order when subjected to sharp bending over and over. 

I do have a question for you: You've stated several times that Fury "is" Dyneema SK90, and now claim Rhino may be SK78 yet your boss says they can't use the Dyneema name because they use "several different" suppliers. What am I to assume from this? Are the Brownell materials a hit or miss on what you get with each batch based on which supplier they are using at the time?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> From an outsider to the manufacturing of bowstrings i get to look from a completely level playing field. One thing that i see and appreciate
> is that there is only a couple, one in particular, bowstring makers that have something positive to say about both companies newest materials. Others are going out of their way to try and make one companies newest product look bad and its just not working.


Yes, and I'm sure BCY really appreciates the, "Great product you have there! Congratulations on your second place trophy!" that seems to be a constant and continuing mantra around here. These continual marketing strategies that claim "better than" for every product introduced are only coming from one side of the isle for the most part. I have "never" seen any BCY product introduced with an attack on it's competitor. On the other hand BCY's competition's latest products are always positioned in this "better than" manner by folks directly connected to that company. So, I as one that has been very happy with BCY, its products and their support for many years may have to come in and say "I don't think so!" from time to time. There is a difference.

Example: 


runninghounds said:


> Having switched from bcy to fury by brownell no reason to ever deal with string stretch,peep rotation,fuzzing the fury just don't do this as far as colors fading IMO only thing fading is BCy


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Yes, and I'm sure BCY really appreciates the, "Great product you have there! Congratulations on your second place trophy!" that seems to be a constant and continuing mantra around here. These continual marketing strategies that claim "better than" for every product introduced are only coming from one side of the isle for the most part. I have "never" seen any BCY product introduced with an attack on it's competitor. On the other hand BCY's competition's latest products are always positioned in this "better than" manner by folks directly connected to that company. So, I as one that has been very happy with BCY, its products and their support for many years may have to come in and say "I don't think so!" from time to time. There is a difference.
> 
> Example:


I don't think I've ever seen Brownell come out with an advertisement that said anything close to "Our stuff is better, BCY is worse". They only advertise the qualities of their products and don't say anything about the competition. You may think that they are "advertising" through these threads and directly comparing their materials to the other but that's only because the people starting the threads are directly asking for a comparison. This thread is even titled "bcy x and fury user findings". The OP was looking for a comparison of the materials so of course people with direct knowledge are going to give them their opinions and findings. 

I don't understand why you've taken it upon yourself to be the over the top BCY cheerleader. The only thing I can think is that you're afraid that the overwhelmingly positive press that Fury is getting is going to cut into your profits as a string maker that does not use Fury to build with. A smart business man would get some Fury and test it out so they don't miss the boat but instead you've gone the other way and are trying to deter people from using Fury. In the process you've made yourself look bad and you've probably driven away more potential customers than you ever could have hoped to steer away from Fury.

That's just my take on it.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

I build with both Fury and X daily and have not had any issues with creep out of either material. I wouldn't offer a material to my customers that I don't have 100% confidence in. If a customer asks my opinion on which material is better I usually suggest Fury because I know it doesn't budge if built properly, it's faster and it doesn't fuzz. It does seem to stay cleaner because it makes a really tight bundle and it's easier to clean should it get dirty. Fury does take longer to stretch, although I do usually stretch my Fury strings overnight I'm not 100% sold on the idea that a 70lb. bow produces enough tension to make the strings budge if stretched for 1.5 hrs. My first test set was stretched for exactly 1.5 hrs and the customer said nothing has budged. My customer measured his strings by pulling tension on them with a machinists lathe and he measured the lengths with a large set of calipers at his shop. He installed the strings, shot 100 arrows and removed the strings to check measurements. After 100 shots he measured an increase between .005"-.008". He installed the strings on his bow and shot 400-500 arrows before measuring again. He claims the measurements have not changed since the first 100 shots. He has thousands of shots on the strings and says everything is measuring the same as it did after his first 100 arrows. So, they moved about the thickness of a human hair, a piece of paper or half that of a business card and haven't budged since. I'm not saying the same results can't be had with Bcy X but in my opinion Fury has the edge right now. You can also get an actual White material in Fury.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

sniper10177 said:


> I build with both Fury and X daily and have not had any issues with creep out of either material. I wouldn't offer a material to my customers that I don't have 100% confidence in. If a customer asks my opinion on which material is better I usually suggest Fury because I know it doesn't budge if built properly, it's faster and it doesn't fuzz. It does seem to stay cleaner because it makes a really tight bundle and it's easier to clean should it get dirty. Fury does take longer to stretch, although I do usually stretch my Fury strings overnight I'm not 100% sold on the idea that a 70lb. bow produces enough tension to make the strings budge if stretched for 1.5 hrs. My first test set was stretched for exactly 1.5 hrs and the customer said nothing has budged. My customer measured his strings by pulling tension on them with a machinists lathe and he measured the lengths with a large set of calipers at his shop. He installed the strings, shot 100 arrows and removed the strings to check measurements. After 100 shots he measured an increase between .005"-.008". He installed the strings on his bow and shot 400-500 arrows before measuring again. He claims the measurements have not changed since the first 100 shots. He has thousands of shots on the strings and says everything is measuring the same as it did after his first 100 arrows. So, they moved about the thickness of a human hair, a piece of paper or half that of a business card and haven't budged since. I'm not saying the same results can't be had with Bcy X but in my opinion Fury has the edge right now. You can also get an actual White material in Fury.


Those pure white strings are AWESOME looking. I'd loose my mind if they started to get dirty though.


----------



## tsm213 (Apr 26, 2011)

One thing I've learned in this thread is I never want to deal with someone like EPLC when buying anything. 
I'm glad there's other knowledgeable makers here.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

Huntinsker said:


> Those pure white strings are AWESOME looking. I'd loose my mind if they started to get dirty though.


LOL! I normally try to talk customers out of all white but I thought those would look good on a black TRG7. It was for an indoor bow so they might still be halfway clean.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

I realize that some makers recieved fury from Brownell before it was available to the general public, so how long has it been on bows? I'm only asking cause I would think if it was going to have any issues with creep or major fading/fuzzing it's had plenty of time on the bows to do so.


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

Brownitsdown12 said:


> Can you guys post more pics of finished fury sets, I'm thinking about getting a set soon , thanks


I have this Fury string on the stretcher right now. I love the colors, which are even brighter than in the pic, and Fury is the easiest material to work with that I have ever used. Earlier this morning, I built something using 452x and now that I have been using Fury for awhile, I really hate that stuff. I have never used BCY X, but after my experience with Fury, I see no need to look any farther.

The string in the pic has been de-waxed and burnished so what you see is what you get. There is no extra wax of make the string look artificially smooth and it has been only moderately burnished.

My Bowtech Sentinel was shooting 276 fps @ 50# using 452x, but now it is up to 286 fps with Fury strings. I'll take that any day, and the feel of the shot is better.

I love Fury and use it exclusively.

Automan


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

automan26 said:


> I have this Fury string on the stretcher right now. I love the colors, which are even brighter than in the pic, and Fury is the easiest material to work with that I have ever used. Earlier this morning, I built something using 452x and now that I have been using Fury for awhile, I really hate that stuff. I have never used BCY X, but after my experience with Fury, I see no need to look any farther.
> 
> The string in the pic has been de-waxed and burnished so what you see is what you get. There is no extra wax of make the string look artificially smooth and it has been only moderately burnished.
> 
> ...


That's a good lookin string automan26!!!! That yellow is super bright!


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

That is a great looking string.


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

jim p said:


> That is a great looking string.


I only wish that you could see it in person. Those colors glow like a neon sign. 

Automan


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

EPLC said:


> Yes, and I'm sure BCY really appreciates the, "Great product you have there! Congratulations on your second place trophy!"


 According to everyone's claims that use fury on the bow and the look of the finished product, it seems this statement is true. Time will tell if big name bow companies switch to fury or continue with bcy which will have alot to do with sales


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> According to everyone's claims that use fury on the bow and the look of the finished product, it seems this statement is true. Time will tell if big name bow companies switch to fury or continue with bcy which will have alot to do with sales


Haha yeah I'm not sure what EPLC is thinking. Last I checked, the free market wasn't about every company getting an "everybody's special, blue participation ribbon" just for existing. I'm pretty sure the company with the best products get the best reviews. 

Maybe BCY will come out with a product that looks better and performs better than Brownell next year and then they can get the good reviews. Until then, they get the second place ribbon from me.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Well its a safe bet to say if you made an identical color set of strings one in X and one in Fury and let your customer see them and decide which one they like better i would bet at least 9 out of 10 will pick the Fury set.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

I have had a lot of strings made by different builders and a lot is to be said about a good builder. Have had strings made with the same material and one set moved a mile and the other held true. So it's not just material but the build process as well that gives you great end results.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

ontarget7 said:


> I have had a lot of strings made by different builders and a lot is to be said about a good builder. Have had strings made with the same material and one set moved a mile and the other held true. So it's not just material but the build process as well that gives you great end results.


The builder and their skill is the number one factor in if you're going to get a good set of strings or not. Of course it helps to work with good materials and right now, we're very lucky to have some great materials on the market from both Brownell and BCY. When it comes down to it, choose the builder you want to use and trust their process.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Huntinsker said:


> The builder and their skill is the number one factor in if you're going to get a good set of strings or not. Of course it helps to work with good materials and right now, we're very lucky to have some great materials on the market from both Brownell and BCY. When it comes down to it, choose the builder you want to use and trust their process.


x2!


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I guess that my strings are truly great and fantastic because of my building skills that you fellows taught me. I know that I am not an artist but the basic skills seem to get the job done. I don't even serve end loops. I just wrap them with tag ends.

I probably have the record on stretch time. I once left a string on the stretcher for 1 year. I was nervous about using the string so I called BCY and asked if the material would still be good. They gave me the ok and I have been shooting the string for a year now.

The fury strings look beautiful and now automan is telling me that he picked up 10 fps using the fury. This is really twisting my arm.


----------



## AUSSIEDUDE (Apr 17, 2009)

jim p said:


> I guess that my strings are truly great and fantastic because of my building skills that you fellows taught me. I know that I am not an artist but the basic skills seem to get the job done. I don't even serve end loops. I just wrap them with tag ends.
> 
> I probably have the record on stretch time. I once left a string on the stretcher for 1 year. I was nervous about using the string so I called BCY and asked if the material would still be good. They gave me the ok and I have been shooting the string for a year now.
> 
> The fury strings look beautiful and now automan is telling me that he picked up 10 fps using the fury. This is really twisting my arm.



10fps? This thread is getting ridiculous.


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

AUSSIEDUDE said:


> 10fps? This thread is getting ridiculous.


I will agree that 10 fps sounds like a lot and it is not typical, but those are my numbers. In the pic you see my Sentinel twins. Both are set up nearly identically. Both are wearing Fury. The orange one at the top of the pic is getting 286ish while the yellow one at the bottom is getting 281ish. OT2 which has been dead-on for these bows in the past says I should be getting around 276 fps and that is very close to what I got through the chrony. (I think I may have gotten 278-279.) Anyway, that's what _*I*_ got and others are free to differ in their opinions of what I am reporting, but when I printed out the OT2 sight tapes, the 287 tape is spot-on.

Awhile back, after receiving my free sample of Fury, I was asked to respond to a survey on my opinion of Fury. I said at that time that I love Fury, but have a bit of difficulty with the higher cost over the 452x I had currently ordered and would be stuck with for quite awhile. I said some flattering things on the survey and I got a response back that they would cut me a deal on the cost if I came on AT and said what I put as comments in the survey. I never took them up on their offer, so what I am saying here is my unsolicited and un-paid-for opinion. In the survey my comments were something like, "I think that Fury is fantastic and I would say, Move over BCY, there's a new sheriff in town and his name is Fury." (And I am not getting a dime to say this, but this is what Brownell liked and wanted to cut me a deal to come here to say.) I believe it to be so.

Automan


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Automan, how many strands do you use in your strings and which servings do you use? I am shooting less than 50 lbs and would like to go with the lowest strand count. So am I looking at 28 strands or can I go lower?


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

I make most of my personal strings at 24 for the string and 26 for the cable. It works well with a .018 center serving.

Automan


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

I am shooting 50#. 3D works well for end serving with this strand count. I think it is also .018".

Automan


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Thanks.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

automan26 said:


> I make most of my personal strings at 24 for the string and 26 for the cable. It works well with a .018 center serving.
> 
> Automan


Thats really low strand count for Fury! Keep me posted how it holds up. I do all strings 28 and most cables 32. I do DST cables 24 strands but there are 4 cables. Elite cables i do 30 strands. I have done a few strings with 26 strands but it was really tiny.


----------



## PAKraig (Sep 19, 2005)

retrieverfishin said:


> I cannot wait to get some fury in my hands in the next couple of days so I can make my own call on this. Crazy.


I'm ready for you to have it too!


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

automan26 said:


> I will agree that 10 fps sounds like a lot and it is not typical, but those are my numbers. In the pic you see my Sentinel twins. Both are set up nearly identically. Both are wearing Fury. The orange one at the top of the pic is getting 286ish while the yellow one at the bottom is getting 281ish. OT2 which has been dead-on for these bows in the past says I should be getting around 276 fps and that is very close to what I got through the chrony. (I think I may have gotten 278-279.) Anyway, that's what _*I*_ got and others are free to differ in their opinions of what I am reporting, but when I printed out the OT2 sight tapes, the 287 tape is spot-on.
> 
> Awhile back, after receiving my free sample of Fury, I was asked to respond to a survey on my opinion of Fury. I said at that time that I love Fury, but have a bit of difficulty with the higher cost over the 452x I had currently ordered and would be stuck with for quite awhile. I said some flattering things on the survey and I got a response back that they would cut me a deal on the cost if I came on AT and said what I put as comments in the survey. I never took them up on their offer, so what I am saying here is my unsolicited and un-paid-for opinion. In the survey my comments were something like, "I think that Fury is fantastic and I would say, Move over BCY, there's a new sheriff in town and his name is Fury." (And I am not getting a dime to say this, but this is what Brownell liked and wanted to cut me a deal to come here to say.) I believe it to be so.
> 
> Automan


It's only more expensive by appearance. If you calculate it by cost per inch it's competitive with X. I did the calc earlier in the tread based on a Lancaster Pricing.


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

My next strings will be Fury !


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> It's only more expensive by appearance. If you calculate it by cost per inch it's competitive with X. I did the calc earlier in the tread based on a Lancaster Pricing.


Re-post from earlier in the tread

Numbers per Lancaster Pricing 

Fury 3160 ft per 1/4#, @ 62.99 = $0.01993 per foot
BCY X 2375ft per 1/4# @ 54.99 = $0.02315 per foot

Average single cam string
88" Fury = 205' at 28 strands = $4.08
X = 176' at 24 strands = $4.07

Average single cam buss 
32" Fury = 85' at 32 strands = $1.69
X = 64' at 24 strands = $1.48


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> Re-post from earlier in the tread
> 
> Numbers per Lancaster Pricing
> 
> ...


I actually think these numbers would be a little closer even because most guys go 26 of X on the cables and some, like Hoyt factory threads go 28. I think where the big difference is to high volume builders and the bow manufacturers is in the large bulk quantities. I have a feeling BCY has the edge in that area.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> Re-post from earlier in the tread
> 
> Numbers per Lancaster Pricing
> 
> ...


Just curious as to how you came up with the number of feet on each 1/4# spool?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Also curious as to the diameter of a 28 strand Fury string.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Also curious as to the diameter of a 28 strand Fury string.


I just measured 2 of mine and with .014 halo, they were .100" and .1005" and with .021" 62xs, they were .109". The 32 strand cables with .014" halo is .107".

Your results may vary.

One string was Hunter Green/Black with silver pinstripes and the other was that Black/Silver with Flo Orange pins if the color makes a difference to you.


----------



## fastpassthrough (Jan 25, 2003)

I have been testing both of these for the new 2016 line and I can tell you will have the Fury on the new bows!


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

fastpassthrough said:


> I have been testing both of these for the new 2016 line and I can tell you will have the Fury on the new bows!


Very cool!! Hope you guys can secure some more dealers and get the brand back to where it once was. My first compound was a Martin Cougar Magnum and I hope for only good things for you guys.


----------



## 4 Fletch (Jan 25, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> I think any of the string makers on this forum could make better strings out of dental floss than most manufacturers throw on their bows made from X or Fury.


Good potential sig line there. :wink:

I've a rubber tube peep on my plain black 2.5-year-old factory original string. I'd like to add a new Nite Hawk peep -- PLEASE don't start in on _my choice_ of peep; I'm sure yours is better because you own it -- yet I know my string will twist in every direction except the one that lets me look thru it. 

I don't care about looks as much as I care about shot placement and reliability. And twisted peeps drive me fornicating nuts. 

In addition to the difficulty deciding on a) string maker and b) color(s)... I also have to learn if I have Y or control or buss cables or some combination. 

And now thanx to you and this thread I'm completely buried under information. I'll have to ask the string maker for a professional opinion. May even let him choose the color too. 

Gentlemen string makers, THANK YOU for all of the free information you've been dispensing in this thread. Even the "Ford vs Chevy" stuff. 
I'm very grateful for all I'm learning on this forum.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Huntinsker said:


> Very cool!! Hope you guys can secure some more dealers and get the brand back to where it once was. My first compound was a Martin Cougar Magnum and I hope for only good things for you guys.


My good friend who is a huge fan of Hoyts and Obsession bows told me today he shot one of the new Martins the other day and was VERY impressed with it. Mid 90s Martin was king of the hill. Highest quality bows on the market. It would be cool to see a huge comeback. Bump the quality of the limbs and risers like they used to be and i see that could happen.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

4 Fletch said:


> Good potential sig line there. :wink:
> 
> I've a rubber tube peep on my plain black 2.5-year-old factory original string. I'd like to add a new Nite Hawk peep -- PLEASE don't start in on _my choice_ of peep; I'm sure yours is better because you own it -- yet I know my string will twist in every direction except the one that lets me look thru it.
> 
> ...


With a good string you won't need or want a peep tube. Good strings don't rotate at all. No matter if its 452x, 8190, X, Fury, Xcel, Rhino, etc. Anything will shoot better than a string that rotates so much that you need a tube to hold it still! But i would suggest just ask your builder what they prefer to build with. Fury or X material are both the top materials right now but if you want silence and super soft shot there is also Rhino and a lot of builders carry that as well. Choose one of the builders on this site. They all have reviews on here and have reputations to uphold.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Ray knight said:


> My good friend who is a huge fan of Hoyts and Obsession bows told me today he shot one of the new Martins the other day and was VERY impressed with it. Mid 90s Martin was king of the hill. Highest quality bows on the market. It would be cool to see a huge comeback. Bump the quality of the limbs and risers like they used to be and i see that could happen.


I agree. If they could make great shooting bows with outstanding quality, they'll have a chance. They can't afford to have even a hint of a problem like they had with their limbs in the last 5-6 years. It's going to take near perfection to get a lot of people to try them again. Where I work, we carried them up until 2012 but when they were in danger of going out of business, we had to drop them. We do have a couple of their recurves again so I'm hopeful we'll pickup their compound line again.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

One thing is for sure they will have the best looking stock strings on the rack.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Haha yeah I'm not sure what EPLC is thinking. Last I checked, the free market wasn't about every company getting an "everybody's special, blue participation ribbon" just for existing. I'm pretty sure the company with the best products get the best reviews.
> 
> Maybe BCY will come out with a product that looks better and performs better than Brownell next year and then they can get the good reviews. Until then, they get the second place ribbon from me.


Problem is that all of these claims have been around before, for each and every product they have introduced back as far as you can search. Do a search on any Brownell product and you'll see almost word for word what is being pitched about Fury. And I'm not saying Fury is a bad product, I'm only saying we've heard all this before from Ultracam to Astro Flight.


----------



## pbuck (Mar 30, 2010)

Smh.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

EPLC said:


> Just curious as to how you came up with the number of feet on each 1/4# spool?


Off my info that had feet per pound. Took that number and divided by 4.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Problem is that all of these claims have been around before, for each and every product they have introduced back as far as you can search. Do a search on any Brownell product and you'll see almost word for word what is being pitched about Fury. And I'm not saying Fury is a bad product, I'm only saying we've heard all this before from Ultracam to Astro Flight.


Same thing with all new BCY materials. No difference there. Even more so really. How many threads about BCY-X?? These materials have come a LONG way. All of them. BCY-X AND Fury.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Problem is that all of these claims have been around before, for each and every product they have introduced back as far as you can search. Do a search on any Brownell product and you'll see almost word for word what is being pitched about Fury. And I'm not saying Fury is a bad product, I'm only saying we've heard all this before from Ultracam to Astro Flight.


I heard the same thing about 8190 when it came out. I made a couple strings out of it and haven't touched it since. I might use it on my recurves but that's about it. I did use it to do an experiment the other day so as not to waste any of my good stuff haha. Most other builders immediately started trying to unload their 8190 to get rid of it not long after it came out too. 

The big difference is that Fury is living up to the claims.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> I heard the same thing about 8190 when it came out. I made a couple strings out of it and haven't touched it since. I might use it on my recurves but that's about it. I did use it to do an experiment the other day so as not to waste any of my good stuff haha. Most other builders immediately started trying to unload their 8190 to get rid of it not long after it came out too.
> 
> The big difference is that Fury is living up to the claims.


Sounds like the Astro Flight story... but lets not go down that path. 

8190 and Fury are the same material, assuming that Fury is DCM SK90 as stated by Ray Knight and Brownell in earlier posts. "If" we are talking SK90, the only real difference I see is the recommended number of strands between the two products, 24 for 8190 and 28 for Fury. That's a 14% increase in SK90 in Fury. If you add 4 more strands to 8190 you will increase the stability by 14%. Because of the GORE material in 8190 there will be a "slight" increase in diameter but this is a very small increase. I've used 8190 without issue since its introduction and have had no issues but I generally use 26 strands for strings and 28 for cables. Also, early spools of 8190 had too much wax... and small diameter materials, no matter what the brand, "will" have wax displacement issues. Wax displacement is not a material issue, it is a process issue and that process issue has been long resolved. I believe BCY's recommendation of 24 strands for 8190 could/should be upped to 24-28. I believe we would then be talking apples to apples. Now if you go to 26-28 strands of BCY-X... Wow! Since cables take most of the stress in most compound bows 28 strands of BCY-X should solve a lot of cable creep issues. 

This discussion has inspired me to do a little experimentation with strand count using both BCY-X and 8190. Yesterday I built a string set for my Dominator MD which I will be installing later this week (waiting for MD cams to arrive). This is why I asked about the 28 strand Fury finished diameter. I'm looking for string diameter, not over the serving diameter. If anyone would post this diameter I would appreciate it.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

I cant help but laugh when people say 8190 is the same as FURY, the FURY's performance speaks for itself. I find it very funny that all the experts that have bad things to say about FURY are the only ones who haven't used it. I'm stepping in to clear up the air and false claims that are being made about FURY by people who have yet to use it. I think we have beat this dead horse and Im not looking to get in a argument about what material is best. Ton of good builders out there with all materials, FURY is not 8190, nor x, nor astro etc. If you want to give the FURY a fair shake and build with it then we would love to hear your opinion on it. Thanks Guys!


----------



## jmann28 (Nov 22, 2010)

Brownell said:


> I cant help but laugh when people say 8190 is the same as FURY, the FURY's performance speaks for itself. I find it very funny that all the experts that have bad things to say about FURY are the only ones who haven't used it. I'm stepping in to clear up the air and false claims that are being made about FURY by people who have yet to use it. I think we have beat this dead horse and Im not looking to get in a argument about what material is best. Ton of good builders out there with all materials, FURY is not 8190, nor x, nor astro etc. If you want to give the FURY a fair shake and build with it then we would love to hear your opinion on it. Thanks Guys!


If you want to put things to rest, why not disclose the makeup of all your material?


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

See post 86 for explanation. Thanks



jmann28 said:


> If you want to put things to rest, why not disclose the makeup of all your material?


----------



## retrieverfishin (Oct 18, 2010)

Brownell said:


> I cant help but laugh when people say 8190 is the same as FURY, the FURY's performance speaks for itself. I find it very funny that all the experts that have bad things to say about FURY are the only ones who haven't used it. I'm stepping in to clear up the air and false claims that are being made about FURY by people who have yet to use it. I think we have beat this dead horse and Im not looking to get in a argument about what material is best. Ton of good builders out there with all materials, FURY is not 8190, nor x, nor astro etc. If you want to give the FURY a fair shake and build with it then we would love to hear your opinion on it. Thanks Guys!


Planning on giving it a shot as soon as it arrives!


----------



## jmann28 (Nov 22, 2010)

Brownell said:


> See post 86 for explanation. Thanks


You sure you meant post 86? That doesn't seem to have anything to do with what I asked


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

jmann28 said:


> You sure you meant post 86? That doesn't seem to have anything to do with what I asked


Think he meant post 38.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Brownell said:


> I cant help but laugh when people say 8190 is the same as FURY, the FURY's performance speaks for itself. I find it very funny that all the experts that have bad things to say about FURY are the only ones who haven't used it. I'm stepping in to clear up the air and false claims that are being made about FURY by people who have yet to use it. I think we have beat this dead horse and Im not looking to get in a argument about what material is best. Ton of good builders out there with all materials, FURY is not 8190, nor x, nor astro etc. If you want to give the FURY a fair shake and build with it then we would love to hear your opinion on it. Thanks Guys!


So, we are talking DSM's SK90 Dyneema. You say it's not the same, but it is the same? Per BCY's statement; SK90 is "The world's strongest HMPE - DSM's SK90 Dyneema." So, help me with the math here. Your SK90 (although not labeled as such) recommends 28 strands and BCY's SK90 recommends 24 strands. I say add 4 more strands to their SK90 and its the same. And believe me I'm not saying SK90 is bad, in fact I'm saying it's good, quite good. Hey, even better from a stability standpoint with a little Vectran added to the already stabile material. 



Brownell said:


> See post 86 for explanation. Thanks


I believe you may have been referring to #38



Brownell said:


> UHMWPE is the same material make up of DYNEEMA. Dyneema is just a branded name for the product. FURY is not a skinnier version of Rhino, you can see that in the build process alone. FURY is a higher grade of material (sk90). As stated before we do not use only 1 supplier for our HMPE / UHMWPE so we are not permitted to use the Dyneema name. The fury and rhino both perform great and have proven themselves in applications, so we are not too bent out of shape about not using a brand name. Brownell has offered quality products to the industry and we will continue to keep innovating! Please let me know if you have any other questions! Thanks guys!


I think if I were paying for the best HMPE product available (DSM SK90) I would want to label it as such. Same with Rhino, if it is actually DSM SK78? I'm sure DCM would not have an issue with you labeling your products with their (C) brand if you were using it. As a matter of fact, I think they would insist on it.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC, I don't think what you would do matters one bit to Brownell and what they do. They don't use DSM SK90 exclusively so they can't call their material SK90 Dyneema. It's that simple. There is no further explanation needed unless you're just wanting to be a Brownell troll. 

I think you just need to stop wanting to make Fury and 8190 the same thing. They are different and if you were to get some Fury to try, you'd see that. It really doesn't matter if Fury is made from dog crap, if it out performs other materials, people will use it and like it. You just need to get over it that BCY may not be making the best all around material right now. Life will move on.


----------



## bseltzer (Nov 20, 2014)

Lots of good information here, but it wouldn't amount to 9 pages worth if the thinly veiled trolling and responses to it were trimmed out.

Just sayin'...


----------



## bowhuntermitch (May 17, 2005)

I've used BCY many times over the course of the years. 452x, its been my go to material. I've used VTX through VT a few times too with good success. Never had ANY issues. 

My next set will without a doubt be Brownell. Whether its Rhino, or FURY I have yet to decide. 

EPLC, I don't see why you continue to argue. You're trying to call Brownell out now? Telling him he doesn't know what his own product is made out of? 

I don't know if you have any affiliation with BCY but you've completely turned me off to purchasing any string made out of the BCY material.


----------



## Brownitsdown12 (Aug 26, 2012)

Huntinsker said:


> EPLC, I don't think what you would do matters one bit to Brownell and what they do. They don't use DSM SK90 exclusively so they can't call their material SK90 Dyneema. It's that simple. There is no further explanation needed unless you're just wanting to be a Brownell troll.
> 
> I think you just need to stop wanting to make Fury and 8190 the same thing. They are different and if you were to get some Fury to try, you'd see that. It really doesn't matter if Fury is made from dog crap, if it out performs other materials, people will use it and like it. You just need to get over it that BCY may not be making the best all around material right now. Life will move on.


:clap::clap:


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

Maybe this has already been covered, but how does strand thickness compare between the two materials?

Automan


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

automan26 said:


> Maybe this has already been covered, but how does strand thickness compare between the two materials?
> 
> Automan


X is a little thicker.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> This discussion has inspired me to do a little experimentation with strand count using both BCY-X and 8190. Yesterday I built a string set for my Dominator MD which I will be installing later this week (waiting for MD cams to arrive). This is why I asked about the 28 strand Fury finished diameter. I'm looking for string diameter, not over the serving diameter. If anyone would post this diameter I would appreciate it.


Just to help you out, I measured my string and cable on one of my bows. The bare string with 28 strands of Fury measured .0830-.0840". The cable with 32 strands of Fury measured .0880-.0890".


----------



## 4 Fletch (Jan 25, 2014)

bseltzer said:


> Lots of good information here, but it wouldn't amount to 9 pages worth if the thinly veiled trolling and responses to it were trimmed out.
> 
> Just sayin'...


Maybe... in addition to gleaning information in an easily obtainable form, I also like seeing the human judgements, biases, anecdotal incidents, hearsay, and interesting points of view.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

With those numbers, what size center serving do you use and what is the od of the center served string?


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

jim p said:


> With those numbers, what size center serving do you use and what is the od of the center served string?


Copied this from one of my earlier posts.

"I just measured 2 of mine and with .014 halo, they were .100" and .1005" and with .021" 62xs, they were .109". The 32 strand cables with .014" halo is .107"."

I use .021" 62xs center serving and it ends up at .109".


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Thanks again. I guess that the serving pressure squeezes the bundle tight enough to reduce the diameter so that you get a good diameter for nock fit.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Copied this from one of my earlier posts.
> 
> "I just measured 2 of mine and with .014 halo, they were .100" and .1005" and with .021" 62xs, they were .109". The 32 strand cables with .014" halo is .107"."
> 
> I use .021" 62xs center serving and it ends up at .109".





Huntinsker said:


> Just to help you out, I measured my string and cable on one of my bows. The bare string with 28 strands of Fury measured .0830-.0840". The cable with 32 strands of Fury measured .0880-.0890".


Thank you.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

jim p said:


> Thanks again. I guess that the serving pressure squeezes the bundle tight enough to reduce the diameter so that you get a good diameter for nock fit.


Yeah it's pretty cool seeing just how much the serving will squeeze the string bundle.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Thank you.


You're welcome.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

EPLC are you going to try some fury to make your own decision?


----------



## hoyt em all (Feb 20, 2005)

damm, by the time i use up the material i already have that is already outdated . something new will be the must have and all of this will be ….?
has anyone tried pre-stretching using a wheel(or cam) at both ends as opposed to pulling in a straight line ?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> EPLC are you going to try some fury to make your own decision?


Soon after Huntinsker trys some X... 

Seriously, I've used and tested Astro Flight after hearing the same hype on how it out performed and was more stable than BCY 452X. It was also promoted to be easier to work with and produced a better looking string. So, when I said "been there, done that" I wasn't kidding. After the smoke cleared many of the supporters of "Astro" sold off their supply of it and switched to BCY products. Now we have Fury and now they have reported in this thread that it is SK90, a DSM product... Until this thread I do not believe Fury was identified as such so we've accomplished something here. SK90 "is" the best HMPE product available so if Fury is SK90 than it is a smoken good product. That said, it does not make it a better product...


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Soon after Huntinsker trys some X...
> 
> Seriously, I've used and tested Astro Flight after hearing the same hype on how it out performed and was more stable than BCY 452X. It was also promoted to be easier to work with and produced a better looking string. So, when I said "been there, done that" I wasn't kidding. After the smoke cleared many of the supporters of "Astro" sold off their supply of it and switched to BCY products. Now we have Fury and now they have reported in this thread that it is SK90, a DSM product... Until this thread I do not believe Fury was identified as such so we've accomplished something here. SK90 "is" the best HMPE product available so if Fury is SK90 than it is a smoken good product. That said, it does not make it a better product...


Haha. I don't need to try X because I already found the better option in Fury :wink: Would be silly to take a step back lol. 

Seriously though, I'd like to have all the materials but I'm a broke grad student with a wife who's also in grad school. We're double broke so I can't afford to buy more material right now. That's why I still have a bunch of 452x and only 4 spools of Fury. If I wouldn't take a bath on the 452x, I'd sell it all on here and buy some X and more Fury for sure.


----------



## 48archer (Mar 19, 2009)

Huntinsker said:


> Haha. I don't need to try X because I already found the better option in Fury :wink: Would be silly to take a step back lol.
> 
> Seriously though, I'd like to have all the materials but I'm a broke grad student with a wife who's also in grad school. We're double broke so I can't afford to buy more material right now. That's why I still have a bunch of 452x and only 4 spools of Fury. If I wouldn't take a bath on the 452x, I'd sell it all on here and buy some X and more Fury for sure.


When your ready to go swimming pm me and I will buy the 452x off you.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

48archer said:


> When your ready to go swimming pm me and I will buy the 452x off you.


I'll keep that in mind!


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Huntinsker said:


> That's why I still have a bunch of 452x and only 4 spools of Fury. If I wouldn't take a bath on the 452x, I'd sell it all on here and buy some X and more Fury for sure.


Even though I am a complete believer in fury this kinda goes along with the" latest and greatest " thing cause you wouldn't of bought all that 452x if at the time it wasn't the best. Bcy x and brownell fury have both far surpassed the other materials that their companies had before!


----------



## AUSSIEDUDE (Apr 17, 2009)

bryanroberts said:


> Even though I am a complete believer in fury this kinda goes along with the" latest and greatest " thing cause you wouldn't of bought all that 452x if at the time it wasn't the best. Bcy x and brownell fury have both far surpassed the other materials that their companies had before!



The irony wasn't missed by me either. When 8190 first came out there was a similar fanfare with many of the top string builders switching to it. When I got my first set of 8190 strings I was very impressed, they looked better than any previous set of strings I had used and after a few shoots seemed to be holding up well. It was only when I checked them a couple of months later I realized just how much they had stretched. Now you would have trouble selling spools of 8190. Fury makes a beautiful string and is nice to work with, it is also made of the same or similar material to 8190. If Brownell has improved the build process of Fury so that stretch is no longer a problem then they are on a winner. Ray Knight has stated that he has found no stretch from Fury after prolonged use. While I highly respect his opinion it must be remembered that he is an agent for Brownell. With the amount of Fury strings being made it shouldn't take long for the word to get out about its stability or lack of it. In the mean time I have fitted a set of Fury strings to one of my bows and look forward to seeing if it holds up as good as the BCY X strings I have on my other bows.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

One thing that keeps popping up that bothers me is this requirement to stretch this material for extended periods of time. In my mind this is a red flag.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

EPLC said:


> One thing that keeps popping up that bothers me is this requirement to stretch this material for extended periods of time. In my mind this is a red flag.


Fury takes longer to stretch but it stretches less than X, how is that a bad thing? A 60" Fury string stretches about 1/32" between 1.5 hrs and 5 hrs on the stretcher @ 400 lbs. Your bow is never gonna put that much tension on a string. I've stretched several sets of Fury for 1.5 hrs and they have thousands of shots on them without any movement. You can say whatever you want about Fury but it's here to stay.


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

bryanroberts said:


> Even though I am a complete believer in fury this kinda goes along with the" latest and greatest " thing cause you wouldn't of bought all that 452x if at the time it wasn't the best. Bcy x and brownell fury have both far surpassed the other materials that their companies had before!


I know what you are saying. 452X was the standard when I got into string making and managed to gather about 20 spools (just about every color that interested me). Build lots of sets with the 452X and have no real complaints with the exception of fuzz after X numbers of shots. 

Along came the BCY X and Fury, so bought 5 spools of each to try them out. No doubt the X material is an improved 452X with regards to fuzz. Between the three materials at hand, the Fury came out top with regards to look, durability, and stability. Have tripled the Fury inventory since.

Just your basement string builder here for self and some friends with no interest in charging $$ for string sets (but will take a couple beers). 

One thing I noticed is that most average bow hunters have very little understanding of string durability and stability, and could not tell the difference between these materials. 

The Fury goes on my own personal bows and kept the 452X and X for some friends that want a string set. 

Nothing wrong the 452X and X and they totally make great strings, just like the Fury better.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

mongopino915 said:


> I know what you are saying. 452X was the standard when I got into string making and managed to gather about 20 spools (just about every color that I interested me). Build lots of sets with the 452X and have no real complaints with the exception of fuzz after X numbers of shots.
> 
> Along came the BCY X and Fury, so bought 5 spools of each to try them out. No doubt the X material is an improved 452X with regards to fuzz. Between the three materials at hand, the Fury came out top with regards to look, durability, and stability. Have tripled the Fury inventory since.
> 
> ...


Precisely what I've done. My wife is even shooting a 452x string because I don't have many colors of Fury and 452x still makes a fine string that I'm confident in. That's why my buddies still get a great deal on their strings and why I've kept the 452x around.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> One thing that keeps popping up that bothers me is this requirement to stretch this material for extended periods of time. In my mind this is a red flag.





sniper10177 said:


> Fury takes longer to stretch but it stretches less than X, how is that a bad thing? A 60" Fury string stretches about 1/32" between 1.5 hrs and 5 hrs on the stretcher @ 400 lbs. Your bow is never gonna put that much tension on a string. I've stretched several sets of Fury for 1.5 hrs and they have thousands of shots on them without any movement. You can say whatever you want about Fury but it's here to stay.


I don't see it as a bad thing either. Who cares if it takes a little longer to stretch as long as it doesn't stretch after that. That's been my experience with it over the last year and some odd months. Stretch a little longer, don't touch it after it's on the bow. Like they say on the infomercials..........SET IT AND FORGET IT!!!!!!!


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

AUSSIEDUDE said:


> The irony wasn't missed by me either. When 8190 first came out there was a similar fanfare with many of the top string builders switching to it. When I got my first set of 8190 strings I was very impressed, they looked better than any previous set of strings I had used and after a few shoots seemed to be holding up well. It was only when I checked them a couple of months later I realized just how much they had stretched. Now you would have trouble selling spools of 8190. Fury makes a beautiful string and is nice to work with, it is also made of the same or similar material to 8190. If Brownell has improved the build process of Fury so that stretch is no longer a problem then they are on a winner. Ray Knight has stated that he has found no stretch from Fury after prolonged use. While I highly respect his opinion it must be remembered that he is an agent for Brownell. With the amount of Fury strings being made it shouldn't take long for the word to get out about its stability or lack of it. In the mean time I have fitted a set of Fury strings to one of my bows and look forward to seeing if it holds up as good as the BCY X strings I have on my other bows.





Huntinsker said:


> I don't see it as a bad thing either. Who cares if it takes a little longer to stretch as long as it doesn't stretch after that. That's been my experience with it over the last year and some odd months. Stretch a little longer, don't touch it after it's on the bow. Like they say on the infomercials..........SET IT AND FORGET IT!!!!!!!


As mentioned above in AUSSIEDUDE's post he had no issues "initially" but over time the strings moved. I also noticed that folks have posted they are using either 32 strands of Fury on cables or they are using Rhino. Why, if the material is that stable, would you need to do this? There can be no question that non-blended materials have come a long way in recent history but to assume they have caught up to the stability of the Dyneema/Vectran blends may be disappointing. Of course if you are shooting a low poundage, shorter draw configuration most of todays materials will work out just fine. I think we can also say that there are a lot of very good string materials to choose from and all will have success when built with a solid process.


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

EPLC said:


> One thing that keeps popping up that bothers me is this requirement to stretch this material for extended periods of time. In my mind this is a red flag.


1. A string that stretches less and also takes more time to stretch to reach a virtually creep free state only indicate that the string is more resistant to creeping. If I am not mistaking, resistant to creep is actually a good thing for bow string. 

2. A string that stretches more and takes more time to stretch to reach a virtually creep free indicates that the string is less resistant to creeping (probably not ideal for bow string). 

Some folks may confuse #1 for #2 or #1 with #2.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> As mentioned above in AUSSIEDUDE's post he had no issues "initially" but over time the strings moved. I also noticed that folks have posted they are using either 32 strands of Fury on cables or they are using Rhino. Why, if the material is that stable, would you need to do this? There can be no question that non-blended materials have come a long way in recent history but to assume they have caught up to the stability of the Dyneema/Vectran blends may be disappointing. Of course if you are shooting a low poundage, shorter draw configuration most of todays materials will work out just fine. I think we can also say that there are a lot of very good string materials to choose from and all will have success when built with a solid process.


Because 32 strands gets you to the same finished/served diameter as the other materials on the market and that's what fits the cam tracks. It has very little to do with how stable the material is. I'm sure fewer strands would hold a tune well but why not have a more solid cable that will create a firmer back wall and will be even more resistant to creep AND have it still fit the cam tracks the same as 26 strands of X or 24 strands of 452x? 

I think you're trying to make it that you need these extra strands for stability when the real reason is simply the finished size of the cable. It's not covering up some flaw in Fury but the extra small strand size does make a very nicely round, solid cable.

Also, I have a 29.75" DL and my hunting bow is set at 72lbs. Not short, and not a light poundage yet I've still not had my cam marks move after the string set has been on the bow with a years worth of shooting on it. I think it's safe to say that the "initial" period is long gone and now I'm in the "longer term" territory.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Huntinsker said:


> Because 32 strands gets you to the same finished/served diameter as the other materials on the market and that's what fits the cam tracks. It has very little to do with how stable the material is. I'm sure fewer strands would hold a tune well but why not have a more solid cable that will create a firmer back wall and will be even more resistant to creep AND have it still fit the cam tracks the same as 26 strands of X or 24 strands of 452x?
> 
> I think you're trying to make it that you need these extra strands for stability when the real reason is simply the finished size of the cable. It's not covering up some flaw in Fury but the extra small strand size does make a very nicely round, solid cable.
> 
> Also, I have a 29.75" DL and my hunting bow is set at 72lbs. Not short, and not a light poundage yet I've still not had my cam marks move after the string set has been on the bow with a years worth of shooting on it. I think it's safe to say that the "initial" period is long gone and now I'm in the "longer term" territory.


My bow, on my scale, is 73 lbs and I shoot 32" draw with no issues with fury.


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

Like I said before and these are not my words , it's proven science ....

people can gloss over it all they want 

There is no way , no how and unblended product can be more stable than a blended product 

There is no way 8190, ASTRO , and or smaller denier versions of It, can be more stable than 452x, BCYX , Trophy , VTX , Xcel

People can justify the longer stretch times all they want , but an unblended product will keep stretching , it might slow down once the strands settle (creep) but the material will keep stretching without anything there to help support it ...

Vectran is added to blended products because engineers way smarter than us , a long time ago , figured out that Dyneema by it self is prone to creep and stretch...

Vectran has high strength similar to Kevlar but has better flex and abrasion properties than Kevlar 

Vectran has very low creep properties thats why it's added to Dyneema products like VTX , 452x, and Xcel and X

I'm confused by the logic that string materials that take longer to stretch are somehow better than string materials that stop creeping/stretching and recover sooner

If you look at all the facts , logically and honestly with out getting distracted by shiny objects . Fancy acronyms , there is no way no how anyone can say that an unblended product is more stable than a blended product.

Why do you folks think Brownell and BCY added Vectran to their products in the first place ?

Because Dyneema/Spectra is prone to creeping !

Read post 10 of the link below...it's all factual info , not my words , but it's data we can all read about or call BCY and Brownell and ask them the difference between blended and unblended materials ...don't ask them which is better fury or X, ask them about blended and unblended characteristics 

post 10
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2474638

Also do some research to see what the majority of the top shooters in the world are shooting when their livelihoods depend on a stable platform 

Blended materials are the majority , not the minority , especially on the cables at a very minimum 

I'm just curious , can anyone name a major custom string builder that pushes or uses a non blended product on their pros bows , I'm talking companies like First String, Winners Choice, world champion archery, Vapor Trail, Americas Best who all have top level folks shooting for them , I'm pretty sure that "most" pros have at the very minimum a blended product on their cables 

All I'm saying is read and do some research on the characteristics of Dyneema and Vectran you will see why Vectran is added to a lot of stuff for stability to include missions to space , and shipping industry ...

bottom line Dyneema without anything in it will continue to move on its own period


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Tom, wanted to weigh in on this real quick. So if 452x is a blended material, then it should be more stable than fury being a 100% UHWMPE material.......... However testing and real world applications have shown fury to surpass the 452x,,,,, Vectran was needed to make a creep resistant string in the past with lower grades of HMPE, however with the higher grades of material and manufacturing process we saw no need for the Vectran. The fury's performance speaks for itself, without vectran. Not saying vectran is bad , just saying fury is plenty stable without it!





ex-wolverine said:


> Like I said before and these are not my words , it's proven science ....
> 
> people can gloss over it all they want
> 
> ...


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

^^^^ That's all well and good but there are people who are testing Fury and finding that in actuality, it's been every bit as stable as the blended materials. You can theorize all you want but science proves nothing based on theory. Scientific proof lies in testing and actual data. My data, as well as many others, says that it's at least as stable as the blended materials in the application of bow strings. Is it as stable if you're using it to lift 10 ton steel beams? Maybe not but that doesn't mean squat to us. It's as stable in our specific application and that's as a bowstring and cables. That's it. It doesn't have to lift wrecking balls. I just has to handle a couple hundred pounds of energy from the limbs/cams of a compound bow. 

As far as pros using it, ask wolf44 about his strings and the strings he's made for some of his other pro buddies. According to what I read from him, they're loving Fury on their bows.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

I wouldn't expect anyone who makes a living with their bow to just swap to any material until it has been tested over and over and run through the mud. Now that there has been time and the word is getting out it is starting to show up on bows and imo will continue to do so.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> I wouldn't expect anyone who makes a living with their bow to just swap to any material until it has been tested over and over and run through the mud. Now that there has been time and the word is getting out it is starting to show up on bows and imo will continue to do so.


We also have to remember that these shooters are sponsored by string companies. They really don't have many options of what material they get unless the company that sponsors them has that material as an option. The major manufacturers that ex-wolverine listed all have big contracts with BCY, likely because their high volume pricing is better than that of Brownell. Basically, if the people that are paying your bills don't have it, you don't use it.


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

Brownell said:


> Tom, wanted to weigh in on this real quick. So if 452x is a blended material, then it should be more stable than fury being a 100% UHWMPE material.......... However testing and real world applications have shown fury to surpass the 452x,,,,, Vectran was needed to make a creep resistant string in the past with lower grades of HMPE, however with the higher grades of material and manufacturing process we saw no need for the Vectran. The fury's performance speaks for itself, without vectran. Not saying vectran is bad , just saying fury is plenty stable without it!


Rob 

So your telling me that fury is more stable than Xcel and or VTX ? 

See you guys keep making it about companies , where I have been trying real hard to keep it professional and only speak from the engineering/chemical make up of the blended vs non blended 

Facts are facts 

Have tony look you in the eye and tell you other wise 

So answer me this honestly 
sk90 without Vectran is or would be more stable than sk90 with it ?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Brownell said:


> Tom, wanted to weigh in on this real quick. So if 452x is a blended material, then it should be more stable than fury being a 100% UHWMPE material.......... However testing and real world applications have shown fury to surpass the 452x,,,,, Vectran was needed to make a creep resistant string in the past with lower grades of HMPE, however with the higher grades of material and manufacturing process we saw no need for the Vectran. The fury's performance speaks for itself, without vectran. Not saying vectran is bad , just saying fury is plenty stable without it!


Honest answer now. Didn't Astro Flight come with the same stability claims?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

automan26 said:


> I make most of my personal strings at 24 for the string and 26 for the cable. It works well with a .018 center serving.
> 
> Automan


How many strands of 452X? I ask because you posted a 10fps gain using Fury over 452X and are using 4/2 strands less in your Fury string/cable than the manufacture recommendation. I'd be interested in your results with regard to creep after extended shooting with those threads.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Honest answer now. Didn't Astro Flight come with the same stability claims?


Didn't 8190 have those same claims?


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> As mentioned above in AUSSIEDUDE's post he had no issues "initially" but over time the strings moved. I also noticed that folks have posted they are using either 32 strands of Fury on cables or they are using Rhino. Why, if the material is that stable, would you need to do this? There can be no question that non-blended materials have come a long way in recent history but to assume they have caught up to the stability of the Dyneema/Vectran blends may be disappointing. Of course if you are shooting a low poundage, shorter draw configuration most of todays materials will work out just fine. I think we can also say that there are a lot of very good string materials to choose from and all will have success when built with a solid process.


Rhino for cables is not *needed*. Fury is actually great for cables. What Happens when you use Rhino on cables is you get a softer shot feel and less noise. Really nice to shoot. No stability issues with Rhino as well. The huge Rhino strands are less likely to be cut or damaged. Its crazy durable. Fury cables will give a firmer shot feel and will tune more easily due to less elasticity at the shot. its a trade off. If you want quiet nothing matches Rhino. Fury string makes more speed though.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Didn't 8190 have those same claims?


BCY has always maintained that a blended material will be more stable than a non-blended material. I don't remember them ever reversing that position. Some interesting Q/A http://www.bcyfibers.com/FAQs.php


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> BCY has always maintained that a blended material will be more stable than a non-blended material. I don't remember them ever reversing that position. Some interesting Q/A http://www.bcyfibers.com/FAQs.php


I'm sorry. I wasn't necessarily meaning that BCY claimed that 8190 was more stable than their blended materials. Just that it was very stable and resistant to creep even though we found out that it wasn't that great in that respect. I had a few things going through my mind and kind of jumbled who said what and this and that meant haha. 

I don't think it's smart for any company to directly compare their product to their competitor though. That's always turned me off a little. Let us, the consumers do that for you. A manufacturer should state what their product is and what it does. The end users will do the comparisons and advertise their findings without the company directly needing to.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

ex-wolverine said:


> Like I said before and these are not my words , it's proven science ....
> 
> people can gloss over it all they want
> 
> ...


Tom you make a solid argument for Vectran. You know i love to experiment and test everything! You are absolutely right that Vectran added to Dyneema technically makes a string more stable but if you remember way back when they started adding Vectran to the materials the Dyneema was not even close to as strong as it is today. Those materials needed the added Vectran for it to not move. I would absolutely agree that a 300+# bow with Vectran added should be more stable than without. With the new Dyneema materials on a 60-80# bow we are not even close to pushing the limits of it and it does not creep at all in this range. 17% Vectran in 24 strand X string is only equal to 4 strands which on its own would probably just break at the shot. So if you take away those 4 strands of Vectran you have only 20 strands of good strong Dyneema vs 28 strands good strong Dyneema in Fury which is equal to 24 strands X without Vectran because the strand size difference. So my feeling is that now all the Vectran is really doing on the bow is limiting the elasticity at the shot. Firming up the shot feel. Less elastic movement after the arrow leaves the string. I have had a 60" 24 strand X string and a 60" 28 strand Fury string on stretchers side by side for a week (equal bundle size) and the X string stretched 1/8" farther. So when stretched slowly, the Vectran stretched too. proving my theory about what Vectran actually does in a bowstring. So as far as long term i don't see the Vectran really helping at all with creep since over time on stretchers it had more movement and my thinking is as i said above its because it has less Dyneema. On the shot, there is no doubt a noticeable difference. Lets take 452X vs Rhino for example. SK75+ 33% Vectran vs SK78. I say Rhino because the SK78 is closer to the SK75 in 452X. 452X has 2x the Vectran as X so this would be a very good comparison to test effects of Vectran. The 452X is a lot tighter at the shot. Firm and solid feeling while the Rhino is soft and silent and a bit less consistent tuning shot to shot. No doubt the pure Dyneema takes more shock out of the limbs. The Vectran holds the string from high speed stretching. You can feel it. With X its not as much difference though. To me it seems like its only there to slightly firm up the shot. I don't see X being any more creep resistant than Fury. Both are crazy strong materials. Look at Force 10, Dynaflight 97 and Rhino. All rated for Crossbows. None have Vectran. Crossbows are WAY more violent than compounds on the shot. So my feeling still is Vectran makes a stiffer shot feel. X and Fury are both awesome materials. Bow limbs don't have enough strength to creep either of them. If Fury needed Vectran to be stable, Brownell could have added it. They use Vectran in Xcel and VTX. They made a super strong, super fast and super stable material without the need for it.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> I'm sorry. I wasn't necessarily meaning that BCY claimed that 8190 was more stable than their blended materials. Just that it was very stable and resistant to creep even though we found out that it wasn't that great in that respect. I had a few things going through my mind and kind of jumbled who said what and this and that meant haha.
> 
> I don't think it's smart for any company to directly compare their product to their competitor though. That's always turned me off a little. Let us, the consumers do that for you. A manufacturer should state what their product is and what it does. The end users will do the comparisons and advertise their findings without the company directly needing to.


Then why is it that you have been rah rah rah for the competitions employees doing exactly that?


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Then why is it that you have been rah rah rah for the competitions employees doing exactly that?


I don't think I have. I haven't commented to any of their posts egging them on. I just ignore it like I do with a lot of stuff I read on here. I've done my own comparisons and stated what I've seen and that's it.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> I don't think I have. I haven't commented to any of their posts egging them on. I just ignore it like I do with a lot of stuff I read on here. I've done my own comparisons and stated what I've seen and that's it.


Surly you gest?


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Can SK90 be manufactured in different methods which would provide a stronger material on its own without adding any extras?


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Surly you gest?


Quote me some instances where I've directly showed approval or appreciation to Brownell saying that their product is directly better than BCY.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> Can SK90 be manufactured in different methods which would provide a stronger material on its own without adding any extras?


Neither BCY or Brownell "manufacture" SK90 as it is a grade of Dyneema that is manufactured by DSM. The following is a link to the DSM website which can shed light on some of your questions. http://www.dsm.com/products/dyneema/en_US/about/the-dyneema-brand.html

As I read this it looks like SK78 is actually the leader in creep resistance per DSM. In prior testing of BCY's Dynaflight 10, an SK78 material, this would support my test results and findings. BCY now calls this product Force 10 and markets it as a crossbow string material. Personally, I still use it as it is really tough stuff. That said, SK78 is the only non-blended HMPE material that I have personally tested that doesn't move. Granted I have not tested Fury but I have tested straight SK90 and find SK90 with Vectran is a more stable solution.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Neither BCY or Brownell "manufacture" SK90 as it is a grade of Dyneema that is manufactured by DSM. The following is a link to the DSM website which can shed light on some of your questions. http://www.dsm.com/products/dyneema/en_US/about/the-dyneema-brand.html
> 
> As I read this it looks like SK78 is actually the leader in creep resistance per DSM. In prior testing of BCY's Dynaflight 10, an SK78 material, this would support my test results and findings. BCY now calls this product Force 10 and markets it as a crossbow string material. Personally, I still use it as it is really tough stuff. That said, SK78 is the only non-blended HMPE material that I have personally tested that doesn't move. Granted I have not tested Fury but I have tested straight SK90 and find SK90 with Vectran is a more stable solution.


Force 10 is pretty similar to Rhino. Same SK78 rating, both large strand size. Probably the same soft silent shot. I bet its great on compounds as well. Rhino vs Fury (SK78 vs SK90) the Rhino does move farther on stretchers but still does not budge on the bow. Its drawback is for those that do tag ends its a huge material (best for served ends) and its slower than Fury or X material. Still….its AWESOME. Best for hunting bows. I'd bet Force 10 is as well.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Crazy thing is comparing 8190 and Fury. Both should be the same right? They make similar high speeds but they are not even close in stability on the bow or on the stretchers. Fury is more stable and much less stretch. may have something to do with size of fibers, how tight and evenly they are tensioned when they are twisted together, Who knows but its a very significant difference in the final product.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray, try 26-28 strands of 8190 and then compare the two.

What I don't understand is this ongoing comparison to BCY products when you/Brownell have similar products that could be used for these comparisons? When it is stated that Fury is more stable than 452X, does that also mean it is more stable than XCELL or your other blended products? Is it more stable than Rhino? Is it more stable than the other Brownell blended products such as the special blend you produce for VaporTrail?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> Force 10 is pretty similar to Rhino. Same SK78 rating, both large strand size. Probably the same soft silent shot. I bet its great on compounds as well. Rhino vs Fury (SK78 vs SK90) the Rhino does move farther on stretchers but still does not budge on the bow. Its drawback is for those that do tag ends its a huge material (best for served ends) and its slower than Fury or X material. Still….its AWESOME. Best for hunting bows. I'd bet Force 10 is as well.


I actually prefer the larger diameter material for tag ends... but to each his own. I also use 16 strands of the SK78 material and find that it holds up nicely without having to go to 18. Using 18 is most likely the reason for the speed loss you're getting with Rhino. You should try 16 with the Rhino as it should be plenty if it is SK78. I have a set on my Ovex (read Ovation w/Apex cams) that has been on the bow for over two years that has held up quite well.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Ray, try 26-28 strands of 8190 and then compare the two.
> 
> What I don't understand is this ongoing comparison to BCY products when you/Brownell have similar products that could be used for these comparisons? When it is stated that Fury is more stable than 452X, does that also mean it is more stable than XCELL or your other blended products? Is it more stable than Rhino? Is it more stable than the other Brownell blended products such as the special blend you produce for VaporTrail?


I don't work for Brownell. Just FYI. I just sell their materials. I would say Fury is the most stable of all Brownell materials. More stable than Xcel. More stable than Rhino. The point where Rhino or Fury would move on a bow is a good bit beyond Xcel/XS2/Astro. Both are stronger materials. Rhino is stronger material per strand than Fury. But per finished bundle diameter, Fury is stronger than Rhino. The thread is BCY-X vs Fury. So thats what we are talking about. I have tested Xcel vs 452x and there is virtually no difference in stretch, creep, speed. Xcel is a TOUCH faster but its also a TOUCH smaller strand size. 24 strands Xcel is about the size of 23 strands 452X. Its really that close. I would bet Force 10 stacks up to Rhino very well since its similar and i would love to test both side by side if i had some. I would be glad to build a 28 strand 8190 string to compare to 32 strand Fury string if thats what you want to see. Should be the same diameter. But i have no 8190. Sold that material way back. i used to carry it. If you have Force 10 and 8190 on hand, if you want, i can trade you a spool of Rhino and a spool of Fury and we can both make a test string then trade back. We can see if we have similar results. I'm open to test anything!


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I actually prefer the larger diameter material for tag ends... but to each his own. I also use 16 strands of the SK78 material and find that it holds up nicely without having to go to 18. You should try 16 with the Rhino as it should be plenty if it is SK78. I have a set on my Ovex (read Ovation w/Apex cams) that has been on the bow for over two years that has held up quite well.



I did a 70# Supra with all 16 strands Rhino. The cables were so tiny! The shot feel was too soft for my liking. I always liked 20 strands for the cables and 16-18 for the string. Easier to do tags with thick stuff but does not look as nice in the end. BCY material is normally easier to do tags. At least 452X was. I do all served loops now.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> I did a 70# Supra with all 16 strands Rhino. The cables were so tiny! The shot feel was too soft for my liking. I always liked 20 strands for the cables and 16-18 for the string. Easier to do tags with thick stuff but does not look as nice in the end. BCY material is normally easier to do tags. At least 452X was. I do all served loops now.


If you are getting a skinny 16 strand string with Rhino I'm thinking it's not SK78 as 16 of Dynaflight 10/Force 10 produces the same diameter string as the others with recommended number of strands. Nothing skinny about it.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> If you are getting a skinny 16 strand string with Rhino I'm thinking it's not SK78 as 16 of Dynaflight 10/Force 10 produces the same diameter string as the others with recommended number of strands. Nothing skinny about it.


I'll measure a 16 strand Rhino string. Can you measure a 16 strand force 10? I don't think strand size has anything to do with material grade.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Actually it does as these materials are only sold in specific sizes. I measured both my Ovex (SK78 w/16 strands) and my Dominator TH (X w/24 strands) and they were very close to the same diameters. The SK78 measured at the string and over the .021 center serving .090-.091 & .115/.116 and the X string measured .092/.093 & .115/116. 

Here's a picture of my 2 year old D-10 string (actually it may be closer to 3 years)


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Actually it does as these materials are only sold in specific sizes. I measured both my Ovex (SK78 w/16 strands) and my Dominator TH (X w/24 strands) and they were very close to the same diameters. The SK78 measured at the string and over the .021 center serving .090-.091 & .115/.116 and the X string measured .092/.093 & .115/116.
> 
> Here's a picture of my 2 year old D-10 string (actually it may be closer to 3 years)


Looks mint!! I'll twist up 16 strands Rhino and measure tonight.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

I really don't know how 16 strand Rhino cables would hold out. I do 14 strand cables on DSTs but those have 4 cables. So its more like 28 strand really. Most bows i use Rhino at 20 for cables and 16-18 for string. Never had one budge. I took off the 16 strand cables from my Supra after a few shots because of the shot feel was not to my liking. 20 strands still feels soft but just right.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> Looks mint!! I'll twist up 16 strands Rhino and measure tonight.


There may be 18 on the cable of this bow but the string is definitely 16. Actually there is a spot lower on the string that shows some wear due to hitting or rubbing or whatever, but they do look very good for the age and many shots through this bow. It's a great bow BTW, a 2004 Ovation that I converted to Apex cams. It's like having a Conquest with a roller system. I always hated the Ovation cams.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Funny story. My steel winch cable on my 4wheeler broke this winter. I use it for my plow. I made a new cable with Rhino. It lasted all winter and still looks good! So far its held up better than the steel cable. Now thats DURABLE stuff!


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Here is 16 strands Rhino.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> Here is 16 strands Rhino.
> View attachment 2272226


I like your caliper... Based on that diameter I'm guessing that Rhino isn't SK78. I'm also basing this on your comments on it not being as stable as SK90. My findings are that SK78 is very stable at 16 strands and obviously a larger diameter than Rhino. This would also be supported by the DSM claims about SK78.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I like your caliper... Based on that diameter I'm guessing that Rhino isn't SK78. I'm also basing this on your comments on it not being as stable as SK90. My findings are that SK78 is very stable at 16 strands and obviously a larger diameter than Rhino. This would also be supported by the DSM claims about SK78.


Hard to say. Fury is smaller than 8190. Xcel is smaller than 452x. Could be the way its twisted, wax content, etc. I have not had any stability issues with rhino on a bow though it will move more on the stretcher. Its definately more elastic hence the super soft and quiet shot. Breaks at 135# per strand.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> Funny story. My steel winch cable on my 4wheeler broke this winter. I use it for my plow. I made a new cable with Rhino. It lasted all winter and still looks good! So far its held up better than the steel cable. Now thats DURABLE stuff!
> 
> View attachment 2272194


How many strands is that cable Ray? lol!


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> Hard to say. Fury is smaller than 8190. Xcel is smaller than 452x. Could be the way its twisted, wax content, etc. I have not had any stability issues with rhino on a bow though it will move more on the stretcher. Its definately more elastic hence the super soft and quiet shot. Breaks at 135# per strand.


I haven't had the stretcher movement with SK78 so I think we are talking apples vs. oranges. 8190 is 2 ends of SK90 and 1 end of GORE twisted together and I assume Fury is 2 ends of SK90 making the additional end of GORE the difference in thickness. Same with X except the GORE is replaced with Vectran. I assume the difference between Xcel and 452X is the twist ratio with 452X having a higher twist ratio per ft. Of course this assumes the same base materials, which hasn't really been established... but close enough.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> How many strands is that cable Ray? lol!


I think i did 50 strands or something. Lol. Its HUGE. Tried to match the steel cable thickness. Check out the monster .018 crown served loop.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> I think i did 50 strands or something. Lol. Its HUGE. Tried to match the steel cable thickness. Check out the monster .018 crown served loop.
> View attachment 2272954


That's awesome.Sad thing is it looks alot better than some served loop bowstrings I've seen!


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> That's awesome.Sad thing is it looks alot better than some served loop bowstrings I've seen!


Lol. Just did those up quick. These are my bowstring loops. Little bit smaller.


----------



## JHENS87 (Nov 7, 2009)

Ray knight said:


> Funny story. My steel winch cable on my 4wheeler broke this winter. I use it for my plow. I made a new cable with Rhino. It lasted all winter and still looks good! So far its held up better than the steel cable. Now thats DURABLE stuff!
> 
> View attachment 2272194


Now thats just awesome. Didn't want to wait for a new steel cable to come in? Nice an bright too


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Ray knight said:


> Lol. Just did those up quick. These are my bowstring loops. Little bit smaller.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2273066


Those look really nice Ray, you definitely do nice work...


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ray knight said:


> Lol. Just did those up quick. These are my bowstring loops. Little bit smaller.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2273066


kinda off subject but why did you switch from tag end to served?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> kinda off subject but why did you switch from tag end to served?


I'll bet it's simply that they look better. Ray is a true craftsman so I assume his work "needs" to be visually pleasing.


----------



## Ninja of Kaos (Sep 21, 2012)

Ray knight said:


> Lol. Just did those up quick. These are my bowstring loops. Little bit smaller.
> 
> 
> View attachment 2273066


Those look like strings for a dst 36 with custom lengths...


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Those look really nice Ray, you definitely do nice work...


Thanks!


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I'll bet it's simply that they look better. Ray is a true craftsman so I assume his work "needs" to be visually pleasing.


This and also to save my hands! I use small braided fishing line. 20# invisabread line. Works really well and i've adapted well to a 4 post layup now. I can build served ends as fast as i used to do tag ends. They seem to hold up better. I still do tag ends for my buss cable yokes. I like the look.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

Ninja of Kaos said:


> Those look like strings for a dst 36 with custom lengths...


Yeah buddy!! These are yours. Just finished them up and shipping tomorrow. They came out really good!


----------



## nando87 (Jan 7, 2015)

Question for you builders that use Fury, I was told that although it is a great material there are issues on particular bows that have high friction areas (ex. Xpedition ATR guide and others) and that fury will fray much faster than say 452x.

What are your thoughts on this and have you experienced any issues like this?


----------



## bowhuntermitch (May 17, 2005)

Ray knight said:


> Funny story. My steel winch cable on my 4wheeler broke this winter. I use it for my plow. I made a new cable with Rhino. It lasted all winter and still looks good! So far its held up better than the steel cable. Now thats DURABLE stuff!
> 
> View attachment 2272194


This. Is. Awesome.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

nando87 said:


> Question for you builders that use Fury, I was told that although it is a great material there are issues on particular bows that have high friction areas (ex. Xpedition ATR guide and others) and that fury will fray much faster than say 452x.
> 
> What are your thoughts on this and have you experienced any issues like this?


Some bows just have a bad designed cable guard. Some cable slides will just chew through any cables. I have not seen fury wear any more than other materials but since it is a tiny strand material, i can see that if its going to chew up a cable you are probably better off using a thick strand material like Rhino or Force 10. Less chance of cutting through a larger strand. Better to fix the bow's issue first!


----------



## nando87 (Jan 7, 2015)

Ray knight said:


> Some bows just have a bad designed cable guard. Some cable slides will just chew through any cables. I have not seen fury wear any more than other materials but since it is a tiny strand material, i can see that if its going to chew up a cable you are probably better off using a thick strand material like Rhino or Force 10. Less chance of cutting through a larger strand. Better to fix the bow's issue first!


I understand that there could be a flaw with a design but it sounds like the statement is/could be true regarding Fury fraying more on high friction areas than other material. 

Not to get off subject but I have a new ATR guide from Xpedition and haven't had a single issue with string fray, I was looking into getting a new set of strings and was steered away from Fury due to the friction comment and concern.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

nando87 said:


> I understand that there could be a flaw with a design but it sounds like the statement is/could be true regarding Fury fraying more on high friction areas than other material.
> 
> Not to get off subject but I have a new ATR guide from Xpedition and haven't had a single issue with string fray, I was looking into getting a new set of strings and was steered away from Fury due to the friction comment and concern.


Fury is really durable as far as fray. But if there is a problem bow thats going to chew any material up then you would be better off having something with larger strands. Takes more chewing before a strand pops! make sense?


----------



## nando87 (Jan 7, 2015)

Ray knight said:


> Fury is really durable as far as fray. But if there is a problem bow thats going to chew any material up then you would be better off having something with larger strands. Takes more chewing before a strand pops! make sense?


Absolutely, that's exactly what they said as well. 

I have had great luck so far with my stock strings and the revised guide, but I guess my point was that for someone with a high friction guide or area that doesn't want to modify their bow should stay away from Fury or be cautious of it due to the bow design. So yes, it might be a great string but problems will show that might not show with different strings.


----------



## Ray knight (Jan 9, 2012)

nando87 said:


> Absolutely, that's exactly what they said as well.
> 
> I have had great luck so far with my stock strings and the revised guide, but I guess my point was that for someone with a high friction guide or area that doesn't want to modify their bow should stay away from Fury or be cautious of it due to the bow design. So yes, it might be a great string but problems will show that might not show with different strings.


Fury string/Rhino cables would work well in that case! Even X material is smallish. Rhino, Force 10, Vaportrail's VTX, any of the large strand materials would be my choice on those situations.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Surly you gest?





Huntinsker said:


> Quote me some instances where I've directly showed approval or appreciation to Brownell saying that their product is directly better than BCY.


Can't find any?


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Huntinsker said:


> Can't find any?


crickets


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Is there anyone on this thread that has used Fury that hated it? Did anyone have their bow continually going out of tune?

I would like to try some Fury but my X is working and I just can't justify trying another product. Maybe one day.


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

jim p said:


> Is there anyone on this thread that has used Fury that hated it? Did anyone have their bow continually going out of tune?
> 
> I would like to try some Fury but my X is working and I just can't justify trying another product. Maybe one day.


Not me and No. 

No need to change or find justifications to try the Fury if your X is already working.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

huntinsker said:


> *quote me some instances where i've directly showed approval or appreciation to brownell saying that their product is directly better than bcy*.





huntinsker said:


> can't find any?


Will these do?



huntinsker said:


> *that's because you haven't tried the better material yet. :wink*: What i see in your picture is a nicely positioned peep, no doubt because of a stable string and cables, and then some fuzz and a rough looking string/cable surface. The bundles are not smooth and round and you can see every single strand individually.
> 
> Here is a string set made of fury that's been on my bow since october 2014. I've been shooting this bow getting ready for some 900 rounds this summer so it's seen a lot of long range arrows, especially so in the last 2 months and has thousands of arrows on it already. You can see the perfect position of my peep and you can see that my string and cable are smooth and show no fuzz at all. You can also see where i had my peep marked but moved it up just a smidge haha. I also haven't waxed this string in 3 weeks.





huntinsker said:


> haha yeah i'm not sure what eplc is thinking. Last i checked, the free market wasn't about every company getting an "everybody's special, blue participation ribbon" just for existing. I'm pretty sure the company with the best products get the best reviews.
> 
> *maybe bcy will come out with a product that looks better and performs better than brownell *next year and then they can get the good reviews. *until then, they get the second place ribbon from me*.





huntinsker said:


> eplc, i don't think what you would do matters one bit to brownell and what they do. They don't use dsm sk90 exclusively so they can't call their material sk90 dyneema. It's that simple. There is no further explanation needed unless you're just wanting to be a brownell troll.
> 
> I think you just need to stop wanting to make fury and 8190 the same thing. They are different and if you were to get some fury to try, you'd see that. It really doesn't matter if fury is made from dog crap, if it out performs other materials, people will use it and like it. *you just need to get over it that bcy may not be making the best all around material right now*. Life will move on.





huntinsker said:


> haha. I don't need to try x because *i already found the better option in fury *:wink: Would be silly to take a step back lol.
> 
> Seriously though, i'd like to have all the materials but i'm a broke grad student with a wife who's also in grad school. We're double broke so i can't afford to buy more material right now. That's why i still have a bunch of 452x and only 4 spools of fury. If i wouldn't take a bath on the 452x, i'd sell it all on here and buy some x and more fury for sure.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Will these do?


Well those were my quotes. Those are me that's saying that Brownell's better. I'm the end user and I'm allowed to have my opinion on which material is better. You said that I'm all "rah rah" when Brownell employees directly say that their products are better than BCYs products. None of those quotes that you listed are from anyone but myself. So I guess you were completely wrong when you said that I directly approve of one company directly comparing their product to another companies product.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I don't remember seeing any user that are not satisfied with fury. If all the users are happy after the hot summer, then I would think that fury is a great product.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

jim p said:


> I don't remember seeing any user that are not satisfied with fury. If all the users are happy after the hot summer, then I would think that fury is a great product.


Yah time on the bow through real world conditions always says the most to me about a material. The other thing that has alot to do with my decisions is customer service. Fortunately I've only had one small issue with bcy x and the same with fury and both were handled very well and fast.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

jim p said:


> I don't remember seeing any user that are not satisfied with fury. If all the users are happy after the hot summer, then I would think that fury is a great product.


I made my first string with Fury last year in March I believe. I shot that string all summer while training for the 900 round in the state games. I shot in all kinds of weather getting ready for it including a lot of very hot days. The day of the shoot, it was over something like 93 degrees and humid. The only reason I took the string set off the bow was because I wanted a different color. I haven't had any problem with Fury in the heat or cold.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

Huntinsker said:


> I made my first string with Fury last year in March I believe. I shot that string all summer while training for the 900 round in the state games. I shot in all kinds of weather getting ready for it including a lot of very hot days. The day of the shoot, it was over something like 93 degrees and humid. The only reason I took the string set off the bow was because I wanted a different color. I haven't had any problem with Fury in the heat or cold.


If other users have the same results then I say fury is a great product.

There must be thousands of users and if none are complaining that says a lot. I don't need any strings at this time so I can sit back and wait for the final verdict.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Well those were my quotes. Those are me that's saying that Brownell's better. I'm the end user and I'm allowed to have my opinion on which material is better. You said that I'm all "rah rah" when Brownell employees directly say that their products are better than BCYs products. None of those quotes that you listed are from anyone but myself. So I guess you were completely wrong when you said that I directly approve of one company directly comparing their product to another companies product.


You asked, I responded, you deny. Typical.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> You asked, I responded, you deny. Typical.


I don't think I should even have to deny it because you didn't prove what you accused me of.


----------



## 48archer (Mar 19, 2009)

LOL, I also bet when you asked about the two materials in the beginning you would have never thought you would have gotten 13 pages of answers either.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

48archer said:


> LOL, I also bet when you asked about the two materials in the beginning you would have never thought you would have gotten 13 pages of answers either.


No I didn't but it's been very informative and I'm glad it turned out this way. There is some real intelligent and experienced string builders in this thread and so far I think everyone has either learned something or got a light bulb glowing somewhere.


----------



## ontarget7 (Dec 30, 2009)

Bottom line is, Fury stays put better than any other material I have used. 
Recently had 2 customers come to check tunes one with 452x and the other with Fury. These were customers from back in January and both have shot a bunch. The Fury needed zero adjustment, the 452x needed 1 1/2 full twist in the BC to get cam synch where I left it originally.

From my findings and experience seeing many bows come and go, Fury is my go to from here on out.


----------



## Wood (Aug 3, 2006)

Was that Fury set built with 28 strands for strings and cables?


ontarget7 said:


> Bottom line is, Fury stays put better than any other material I have used.
> Recently had 2 customers come to check tunes one with 452x and the other with Fury. These were customers from back in January and both have shot a bunch. The Fury needed zero adjustment, the 452x needed 1 1/2 full twist in the BC to get cam synch where I left it originally.
> 
> From my findings and experience seeing many bows come and go, Fury is my go to from here on out.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Wood said:


> Was that Fury set built with 28 strands for strings and cables?


most are going 32 on cables. sorry if you already knew that.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

We should just go back to D97 so there's no more griping about two excellent materials

But the real discussion should be will EPLC even try fury and can he give an honest review. Lol


----------



## loveha (Mar 11, 2014)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> We should just go back to D97 so there's no more griping about two excellent materials
> 
> But the real discussion should be will EPLC even try fury and can he give an honest review. Lol


That is what I'm waiting on.

This whole thread has probably been the best one in months though. Nice to have something interesting to read. Last good thread was the back tension debate in intermediate / advanced.


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

This discussion could be a case of David and Goliath where the underdog is proving to be a worthy competitor.


----------



## xhammer23 (Dec 25, 2014)

Anybody with concerns about the durability of Fury on a Xpedition with the ATR cable system can just serve the cables where they run through the ATR. I have BCY X on my Xcentric 7 and its been great. My next set will be Fury though because these guys that say its better are all reputable archers who have used both and have no reason to lie about it. I love BCY X but can't wait to try out some Fury!


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

loveha said:


> That is what I'm waiting on.
> 
> This whole thread has probably been the best one in months though. Nice to have something interesting to read.


I agree 100 percent! I also think that any string builder, regardless of which company they loyally buy from, should build test sets from all makers in order to make their own decisions on which material is better for their customers equipment.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

xhammer23 said:


> Anybody with concerns about the durability of Fury on a Xpedition with the ATR cable system can just serve the cables where they run through the ATR. I have BCY X on my Xcentric 7 and its been great. My next set will be Fury though because these guys that say its better are all reputable archers who have used both and have no reason to lie about it. I love BCY X but can't wait to try out some Fury!


2X_Lung uses Fury on his Xcentric 7 and says it hasn't been a problem. Here's a pic of it in my string building thread. Post #2446 for the pics. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2062893&page=98


----------



## xhammer23 (Dec 25, 2014)

Huntinsker said:


> 2X_Lung uses Fury on his Xcentric 7 and says it hasn't been a problem. Here's a pic of it in my string building thread. Post #2446 for the pics. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2062893&page=98


Thats good to here. Thanks!


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

bryanroberts said:


> I agree 100 percent! I also think that any string builder, regardless of which company they loyally buy from, should build test sets from all makers in order to make their own decisions on which material is better for their customers equipment.


That's the way I would think I would do it but maybe it's the old ford chevy thing and one will always be better than the other!


----------



## Ol' red beard (Sep 2, 2013)

I run fury on roller guard bows and bcy on all others... seems to keep them in top shape that way with no tuning g issues...per recommendation from wes van horn at fury x


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Ol' red beard said:


> I run fury on roller guard bows and bcy on all others... seems to keep them in top shape that way with no tuning g issues...per recommendation from wes van horn at fury x


2X_LUNG runs fury on his xpedition and said he has no issues at all.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

Had a couple archers at the World youth event in yankton running Fury. They experienced extreme heat one day and rain another. Both shot well and the Fury held up in the conditions. These were built as my standard hybrid target bow set-up with 28 strand strings and 32 strand cables.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> Had a couple archers at the World youth event in yankton running Fury. They experienced extreme heat one day and rain another. Both shot well and the Fury held up in the conditions. These were built as my standard hybrid target bow set-up with 28 strand strings and 32 strand cables.


Sweet! Good to know! Congrats on your archers!


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

Flo green and Baby Blue in Fury, couple of my favourite colours.


----------



## 2X_LUNG (May 9, 2009)

bryanroberts said:


> 2X_LUNG runs fury on his xpedition and said he has no issues at all.


Yep, not a single issue. Lots of shots so far too!!


----------



## nando87 (Jan 7, 2015)

2X_LUNG said:


> Yep, not a single issue. Lots of shots so far too!!


That's good to hear, I've heard NOT to shoot fury on high friction guards such as the ATR and other bows due to the individual strands being so thin that they are more susceptible to ware and having issues. 

But it's nice to see someone getting great results with it


----------



## runninghounds (Sep 2, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I've been using BCY's BCY-X since it was first developed and do not believe anything out there will match it. BCY holds the patent on this blend so it can't be copied. BCY's BCY-X uses only genuine Dyneema SK90 in the blend, the highest quality HMPE available. BCY also uses nothing but the best quality HMPE - SK75, SK78 and SK90 or Type 1000 Spectra. Not bashing anyone but this can't be said for some other material suppliers.
> 
> 
> 
> My that's a strange statement considering how many of your products have been filling up the boneyard over the years.


Sorry sir ....I'm not into manufacturing products or own a company that does sorry


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

runninghounds said:


> Sorry sir ....I'm not into manufacturing products or own a company that does sorry


filling up the boneyard???


----------



## bowfisher (Jan 21, 2003)

:moviecorn


----------



## deadduck357 (Dec 29, 2013)

Well I've read enough here. I'm not a string fanatic like many here but it's good to know that as long as I get either bcy-x or fury from one of the fine string makers here I will be fine.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

deadduck357 said:


> Well I've read enough here. I'm not a string fanatic like many here but it's good to know that as long as I get either bcy-x or fury from one of the fine string makers here I will be fine.


Very true. Imo both of those are the best threads that either company has came out with!


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I hadn't seen dwags on here in a while and I have to say, I didn't miss it one bit. What a :crybaby2:


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

My decision is I'm going with 60x and BCY X....Tony219 says 3-4 week lead time....I cant wait that long... 60X in a week... so BCY X it is....ordering tomorrow....


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

There's always that one guy that just doesn't get it!


----------



## TEXASFAN85 (Jan 10, 2015)

I like Meat said:


> My decision is I'm going with 60x and BCY X....Tony219 says 3-4 week lead time....I cant wait that long... 60X in a week... so BCY X it is....ordering tomorrow....


I think I seen 60x is using fury now also.


----------



## AUSSIEDUDE (Apr 17, 2009)

TEXASFAN85 said:


> I think I seen 60x is using fury now also.



Yes he is but he is only offering 30 days warranty, not the 12 months he offers with his BCY X strings. After the stretch problems with 8190 I think he is being rightly cautious.


----------



## loveha (Mar 11, 2014)

AUSSIEDUDE said:


> Yes he is but he is only offering 30 days warranty, not the 12 months he offers with his BCY X strings. After the stretch problems with 8190 I think he is being rightly cautious.


For now, till he has a good feeling about it. He said after sometime if everything turns out good he will extend it to the normal warranty time he gives on his X.


----------



## dhom (Jun 10, 2008)

loveha said:


> For now, till he has a good feeling about it. He said after sometime if everything turns out good he will extend it to the normal warranty time he gives on his X.


At the moment that tells me that the company 60x is not 100% confident in the product and it is still an unproven material in the multiple string makers minds working there. That may change but it is still to be determined. 
Regardless, listening to both sides sounds like both are great products and you can't go wrong with either. Competition is a great thing for us, the end user!


----------



## TEXASFAN85 (Jan 10, 2015)

dhom said:


> At the moment that tells me that the company 60x is not 100% confident in the product and it is still an unproven material in the multiple string makers minds working there. That may change but it is still to be determined.
> Regardless, listening to both sides sounds like both are great products and you can't go wrong with either. Competition is a great thing for us, the end user!


60x says they offer a 30 day warranty on all material until he uses it more said he also had 30 day on the bcy x when first started using it he did say it looks really promising as a material


----------



## dhom (Jun 10, 2008)

TEXASFAN85 said:


> 60x says they offer a 30 day warranty on all material until he uses it more said he also had 30 day on the bcy x when first started using it he did say it looks really promising as a material


Looks promising but if they were 100% confident they would offer the full warranty.


----------



## TEXASFAN85 (Jan 10, 2015)

dhom said:


> Looks promising but if they were 100% confident they would offer the full warranty.


As is said bcy x also had 30 day warranty as did any material when they first uses it


----------



## dhom (Jun 10, 2008)

Not disagreeing and not saying it won't prove to be a great material. I would have no problem ordering it myself. That does not change the fact that at this time they are not 100% confident in it.


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

sniper10177 said:


> There's always that one guy that just doesn't get it!


what do you mean ??


----------



## skynight (Nov 5, 2003)

dhom said:


> Not disagreeing and not saying it won't prove to be a great material. I would have no problem ordering it myself. That does not change the fact that at this time they are not 100% confident in it.


If you've been following this debate over the last year you would have seen 60X previously state that fury did not perform as well as X in his
testing. Sounds like he's done further testing, more field than lab type this time.


----------



## dhom (Jun 10, 2008)

skynight said:


> If you've been following this debate over the last year you would have seen 60X previously state that fury did not perform as well as X in his
> testing. Sounds like he's done further testing, more field than lab type this time.


Hmmm, not sure where this means anything. They are not 100% confident in Fury just yet. Not saying they won't be in the future. 
Read up
http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2517873


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

skynight said:


> If you've been following this debate over the last year you would have seen 60X previously state that fury did not perform as well as X in his
> testing. Sounds like he's done further testing, more field than lab type this time.


Yeah 60x pretty much said after Fury came out that they weren't going to be using it because they didn't feel it was as good as X. They must have seen all the people giving great reviews of Fury and jumping on the bandwagon that they took a second look. Smart on their part because it has proven to be just as good if not better than some of the other materials that they were offering.


----------



## salmon killer (Jun 19, 2011)

I just seen a set of threads made in fury all I can say is the are awesome strings .The string maker is Twisted X.I have used a lot of string makers on AT I do a lot of tuning in my rual area were I live and these are very nice strings.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

I use both bcy X and Fury and I can honestly say that I have not had a single issue with the Fury material or any string that I've used it on. It does in fact stretch less on the stretchers than X. People started saying that it takes a lot longer to stretch than X so it must be bad. A 60" Fury string after being on the stretcher for about an hour only moves a little less than 1/32" between one hour and 5 hours of being on the stretcher. What most don't realize is that bows don't really put enough tension on a string or cable for anyone to notice any stretch if they have a Fury set that's only been stretched for 1-1.5 hrs. The stretch time is what started this scare tactic about Fury. A lot of builders want to turn strings out as fast as possible and the thought of having to stretch strings for 5 hours threw a lot of builders into panic mode. They didn't want customers to start requesting a material that would cut into their bottom line due to extended stretch times. I do usually build Fury sets right before I go to bed and let them stretch all night simply because something needs to be on the stretchers while I sleep and I know for a fact that it's stretched completely. I have also built numerous sets that only stretched for an hour to an hour and a half and they have not budged one bit. Cold weather, Arizona heat, high humidity , it doesn't matter. I have not had a single complaint about Fury or X but I do enjoy building with Fury more than X and I have full confidence in the material until it's proved otherwise. I don't ever remember seeing a post on here where someone was complaining about Hogwire or Ray Knight. Every post that I've seen involving them is usually very fact based and informative. My point is this, if you want to know something about a material call several string builders and ask them to explain the differences to you. Any quality builder will be glad to talk with you and will also be glad that you're taking interest in knowing more about your string material choices. The best thing a builder can have is a customer that knows about the material in their strings because that person is going to be paying attention to what their bow is doing after those strings are installed. Those are the customers that will give you the feedback string builders need when it's time to test new materials. Call several builders that use both Fury and X if you want to know what they recommend. AT has a lot of good information if you look in the right place but it can also be a place to get half the information. My bow has a Fury string set on it and I'm not planning on changing materials any time soon.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

I like Meat said:


> what do you mean ??


It wasn't anything aimed at you. I just find it funny for a die hard Bcy fan to get on here and rant about how people are wrong with their information about Fury simply because he can't build with it.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

sniper10177 said:


> It wasn't anything aimed at you. I just find it funny for a die hard Bcy fan to get on here and rant about how people are wrong with their information about Fury simply because he can't build with it.


Haha! :set1_rolf2:

My favorite part is how he complains of the "one sided and biased information" when everything out of his mouth about Brownell is that it's junk and probably the devil. He made one string with it and started a whole thread and in the title calls the material "junk". Talk about one sided and biased lol.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

Huntinsker said:


> Haha! :set1_rolf2:
> 
> My favorite part is how he complains of the "one sided and biased information" when everything out of his mouth about Brownell is that it's junk and probably the devil. He made one string with it and started a whole thread and in the title calls the material "junk". Talk about one sided and biased lol.


I know, it's ridiculous! That's the AT experts for ya!


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Hoytalpha35 said:


> Flo green and Baby Blue in Fury, couple of my favourite colours.
> 
> View attachment 2329529





2X_LUNG said:


> Yep, not a single issue. Lots of shots so far too!!


I keep hearing about how stable this material is, no peep issues, etc., yet the pictures posted don't seem to match the claims? In both of these posts the peeps are being forced into position by d-loops. Hoytalpha35's peep and loop are at least a 1/4 turn mis-match and 2X_LUNG's are not straight either although I can't tell is they are in line with each other. This is not a knock on any particular material just a reality check. All kinds of claims have been made about certain materials from stability to excessive speed gains. I find that most of these claims are at the very least somewhat exaggerated. 

Peep stability issues are 99% due to the building process, not the material. Excessive speed gains are just plain false claims and not as a result of any material alone.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> *I keep hearing about how stable this material is, no peep issues, etc., yet the pictures posted don't seem to match the claims? In both of these posts the peeps are being forced into position by d-loops. Hoytalpha35's peep and loop are at least a 1/4 turn mis-match and 2X_LUNG's are not straight either although I can't tell is they are in line with each other. This is not a knock on any particular material just a reality check*. All kinds of claims have been made about certain materials from stability to excessive speed gains. I find that most of these claims are at the very least somewhat exaggerated.
> 
> *Peep stability issues are 99% due to the building process, not the material*. Excessive speed gains are just plain false claims and not as a result of any material alone.


So since your argument directly contradicts itself, we'll all just disregard it as mindless drivel from someone who's trying too hard to prove a point that he's already failed at proving over and over again.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

EPLC said:


> I keep hearing about how stable this material is, no peep issues, etc., yet the pictures posted don't seem to match the claims? In both of these posts the peeps are being forced into position by d-loops. Hoytalpha35's peep and loop are at least a 1/4 turn mis-match and 2X_LUNG's are not straight either although I can't tell is they are in line with each other. This is not a knock on any particular material just a reality check. All kinds of claims have been made about certain materials from stability to excessive speed gains. I find that most of these claims are at the very least somewhat exaggerated.
> 
> Peep stability issues are 99% due to the building process, not the material. Excessive speed gains are just plain false claims and not as a result of any material alone.


I see that all the time with BCY X, 452 X, etc. Most likely it's not the material but how they were installed. A bad bow tech can screw up a good set of strings! Not every peep is going to be 100% straight at brace height. What kind of speed gains are you disputing?


----------



## dhom (Jun 10, 2008)

EPLC said:


> I keep hearing about how stable this material is, no peep issues, etc., yet the pictures posted don't seem to match the claims? In both of these posts the peeps are being forced into position by d-loops. Hoytalpha35's peep and loop are at least a 1/4 turn mis-match and 2X_LUNG's are not straight either although I can't tell is they are in line with each other. This is not a knock on any particular material just a reality check. All kinds of claims have been made about certain materials from stability to excessive speed gains. I find that most of these claims are at the very least .


Wouldn't that just be an installer issue? I know when I install my strings I have to twist or untwist my string in order to get my peep straight. This is not a reflection of the material, unless the peep originally was straight and over time it turned.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

dhom said:


> Wouldn't that just be an installer issue? I know when I install my strings I have to twist or untwist my string in order to get my peep straight. This is not a reflection of the material, unless the peep originally was straight and over time it turned.[/QUOTE
> 
> 
> Exactly!!!


----------



## dhom (Jun 10, 2008)

sniper10177 said:


> dhom said:
> 
> 
> > Wouldn't that just be an installer issue? I know when I install my strings I have to twist or untwist my string in order to get my peep straight. This is not a reflection of the material, unless the peep originally was straight and over time it turned.[/QUOTE
> ...


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

sniper10177 said:


> I see that all the time with BCY X, 452 X, etc. Most likely it's not the material but how they were installed. A bad bow tech can screw up a good set of strings! Not every peep is going to be 100% straight at brace height. What kind of speed gains are you disputing?


My point is that there are a lot of "things" credited to "material" that have nothing to do with material, but more than likely are process related. Someone recently claimed a 10 fps speed increase due to material (I can't seem to locate the thread but will). This just isn't possible in an apples to apples test of material. There just isn't that much speed difference in today's modern materials. Non-blend materials will be a tad faster than blended materials one for one, but the increase is only a few feet at best and this can be compensated with fewer strands with the blended materials. This would be true for any material, regardless of manufacture.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> So since your argument directly contradicts itself, we'll all just disregard it as mindless drivel from someone who's trying too hard to prove a point that he's already failed at proving over and over again.


So, the expert gets a couple of free spools of Fury and now is the know-all, be-all for this product. I recently measured a two year old one-cam string made from 8190 that had only moved 3/16" of an inch over that entire period. I'm currently doing some 28 strand tests on 8190 and the results so far are very promising. I also may be testing something else in the near future if things work out...


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

EPLC said:


> My point is that there are a lot of "things" credited to "material" that have nothing to do with material, but more than likely are process related. Someone recently claimed a 10 fps speed increase due to material (I can't seem to locate the thread but will). This just isn't possible in an apples to apples test of material. There just isn't that much speed difference in today's modern materials. Non-blend materials will be a tad faster than blended materials one for one, but the increase is only a few feet at best and this can be compensated with fewer strands with the blended materials. This would be true for any material, regardless of manufacture.


Depends on the bow! I gained 7fps when switching from X to Fury on a Prime One STX string. The string is the only thing I changed. That was swapping a 24 strand X string with a 28 strand Fury string. That bow has a short string too! My chronograph readings both times.


----------



## dhom (Jun 10, 2008)

EPLC said:


> My point is that there are a lot of "things" credited to "material" that have nothing to do with material, but more than likely are process related. Someone recently claimed a 10 fps speed increase due to material (I can't seem to locate the thread but will). This just isn't possible in an apples to apples test of material. There just isn't that much speed difference in today's modern materials. Non-blend materials will be a tad faster than blended materials one for one, but the increase is only a few feet at best and this can be compensated with fewer strands with the blended materials. This would be true for any material, regardless of manufacture.


I have a hard time believing an increase of 10 fps from one material to another as well. A few feet maybe. If there is an improvement of 10 fps when changing strings I am going to guess that some of the increase in speed comes from an improvement to the bow tune. I am not a string expert so maybe I am wrong.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

sniper10177 said:


> Depends on the bow! I gained 7fps when switching from X to Fury on a Prime One STX string. The string is the only thing I changed. That was swapping a 24 strand X string with a 28 strand Fury string. That bow has a short string too! My chronograph readings both times.


While I don't doubt your finding, I believe some other factor(s) were involved. I've tested many materials over an extended period of time and when all variables are equal speed variance is minimal. If you got 7 fps something else was involved...


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

EPLC said:


> While I don't doubt your finding, I believe some other factor(s) were involved. I've tested many materials over an extended period of time and when all variables are equal speed variance is minimal. If you got 7 fps something else was involved...


Well, I guess I need you to come around and show me how to work on bows because all I did was change the string. I will admit that I didn't expect that much of an increase but that's what I got. Shot multiple arrows to make sure it wasn't a fluke. 6-10 fps is the feedback I keep hearing. I'm about to build 2 equal length strings for my bow and see what it does. By string weight alone you should expect 3-5 fps. There's about 8-9 grains difference in a 28 strand Fury string and 24 strand X string. That weight is without serving. Either way I like the material better.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Material alone will not provide a 7-10 fps gain. You know that so quit pulling our chain.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> So, the expert gets a couple of free spools of Fury and now is the know-all, be-all for this product. I recently measured a two year old one-cam string made from 8190 that had only moved 3/16" of an inch over that entire period. I'm currently doing some 28 strand tests on 8190 and the results so far are very promising. I also may be testing something else in the near future if things work out...


Not sure who "the expert" is but if you're referring to me, I don't get anything for free and I'm not a "know-all, be-all" for any product. I know a lot about a lot of things that I use or work with all the time but I'm not getting any sort of free ride from anyone. I saw what you found with your 8190 set and wasn't really impressed but I refrained from commenting because I didn't want to sound rude. I'll say it now.......

Your string stretched 3/16" on a 40lb bow with a 26" draw? Not exactly a torture test for any material. I have a set of Fury threads on my bow, 72lbs drawing 29.75" and the string hasn't increased AT ALL in nearly a year of heavy shooting. I didn't have such luck with 8190 for the short time I used it. A 3/16" increase in length on that 40lb, 26" bow would equate to what.......over a half inch on an average DL and weight bow? I wouldn't be happy with that. If you have that much creep left in the material, you didn't stretch them well enough IMO.


----------



## jim p (Oct 29, 2003)

I don't have any experience with 8190 or fury. It seems that both are made from the same material. So I would expect both to perform similar. I asked 60X if 8190 or fury was the most stable. His answer was that he had found both to be very stable.

It seems that most are agreeing that the time spent on the stretcher is very important to build a stable string.


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

EPLC said:


> I keep hearing about how stable this material is, no peep issues, etc., yet the pictures posted don't seem to match the claims? In both of these posts the peeps are being forced into position by d-loops. Hoytalpha35's peep and loop are at least a 1/4 turn mis-match and 2X_LUNG's are not straight either although I can't tell is they are in line with each other. This is not a knock on any particular material just a reality check. All kinds of claims have been made about certain materials from stability to excessive speed gains. I find that most of these claims are at the very least somewhat exaggerated.
> 
> Peep stability issues are 99% due to the building process, not the material. Excessive speed gains are just plain false claims and not as a result of any material alone.


The Bow wasn't even set-up yet. Don't know if I had a shot through it....So before you come on here bashing have all the information please. 

If you Like now that I have actually shot it and tied in the Peep I can attach another picture....Everything nice and straight. Even in the picture I'd give you an 1/8th of a turn. 

The build process on it was quite fine as well. Oh finally found something I could agree with you on that the Build process is the main issue with peep and stability because these are two fine materials.


----------



## smokin12ring (Dec 4, 2002)

I build will both materials, here is my take. I can make both materials pretty round and look great but the fury will look better. The bundle molds together and defiantly looks great but the x when I'm done isn't far behind it but you can see the strands more in the bundle. Fury is more consistent in diameter from color to color than x as well. The speed of the materials is a wash, some bows fury will be slightly better and some bows x will be slightly faster. The speed difference is so minimal that I don't put any advantage to one or the other. As for actual on the stretcher for me x is done stretching pretty quick where fury takes its time but that seems like everyone is experiencing the same thing. For tuning I have found that since the fury bundle is so molded together it makes very small peep rotations very easy where the x material the peep moves a greater rotation on a half or full twist. The only negative for me on the fury being so molded together is if you have to put several twists in your cables, the x material will hold its roundness better than fury for me when I have to twists the cables up. I actually hate fury when I have to do that to a bow. The molded bundle will blow out with not to many twists. Just my opinion but to me fury holds its original color better than x long term and I've shot both materials since they came out. So what's weird for me though is fury wins a lot of the conversation for me but if I could only choose 1 I would go with x over fury.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

smokin12ring said:


> I build will both materials, here is my take. I can make both materials pretty round and look great but the fury will look better. The bundle molds together and defiantly looks great but the x when I'm done isn't far behind it but you can see the strands more in the bundle. Fury is more consistent in diameter from color to color than x as well. The speed of the materials is a wash, some bows fury will be slightly better and some bows x will be slightly faster. The speed difference is so minimal that I don't put any advantage to one or the other. As for actual on the stretcher for me x is done stretching pretty quick where fury takes its time but that seems like everyone is experiencing the same thing. For tuning I have found that since the fury bundle is so molded together it makes very small peep rotations very easy where the x material the peep moves a greater rotation on a half or full twist. The only negative for me on the fury being so molded together is if you have to put several twists in your cables, the x material will hold its roundness better than fury for me when I have to twists the cables up. I actually hate fury when I have to do that to a bow. The molded bundle will blow out with not to many twists. Just my opinion but to me fury holds its original color better than x long term and I've shot both materials since they came out. So what's weird for me though is fury wins a lot of the conversation for me but if I could only choose 1 I would go with x over fury.


^^^^
These results are spot on with everything I have personally found while testing both materials!


----------



## mongopino915 (Mar 3, 2009)

smokin12ring said:


> I build will both materials, here is my take. I can make both materials pretty round and look great but the fury will look better. The bundle molds together and defiantly looks great but the x when I'm done isn't far behind it but you can see the strands more in the bundle. Fury is more consistent in diameter from color to color than x as well. The speed of the materials is a wash, some bows fury will be slightly better and some bows x will be slightly faster. The speed difference is so minimal that I don't put any advantage to one or the other. As for actual on the stretcher for me x is done stretching pretty quick where fury takes its time but that seems like everyone is experiencing the same thing. For tuning I have found that since the fury bundle is so molded together it makes very small peep rotations very easy where the x material the peep moves a greater rotation on a half or full twist. The only negative for me on the fury being so molded together is if you have to put several twists in your cables, the x material will hold its roundness better than fury for me when I have to twists the cables up. I actually hate fury when I have to do that to a bow. The molded bundle will blow out with not to many twists. Just my opinion but to me fury holds its original color better than x long term and I've shot both materials since they came out. So what's weird for me though is fury wins a lot of the conversation for me but if I could only choose 1 I would go with x over fury.


Can you elaborate on durability (like after 5000 shots) with regards to fuzz and overall visual/appearance between the two materials?


----------



## Hoytalpha35 (Apr 5, 2011)

Few degrees off after set-up. Probably not up to your elitist standard.....


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

jim p said:


> I don't have any experience with 8190 or fury. It seems that both are made from the same material. So I would expect both to perform similar. I asked 60X if 8190 or fury was the most stable. His answer was that he had found both to be very stable.
> 
> It seems that most are agreeing that the time spent on the stretcher is very important to build a stable string.


Jim he told you that because he's selling something and he had to give a vague answer so as to not shine a bad light on one of his products. He still sells 8190 material and string sets so of course he's not going to say anything bad about it. I can tell you from my experience that an 8190 string of the same diameter of a Fury string will creep and stretch noticeably more than the Fury string. I've seen it first hand and that's why I don't use 8190 anymore.


----------



## skynight (Nov 5, 2003)

I have only used 8190 and X. I only use the 8190 for experimentation now. 8190 does creep and stretch but X has been excellent for me. 

I still see this Fury vs. X argument coming down to a matter of aesthetics. The only real fury advantage seems to be cosmetic and the few fury sets I've seen in person do look nice. Not a reason for me to spend the money to play with it.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Jim he told you that because he's selling something and he had to give a vague answer so as to not shine a bad light on one of his products. He still sells 8190 material and string sets so of course he's not going to say anything bad about it. I can tell you from my experience that an 8190 string of the same diameter of a Fury string will creep and stretch noticeably more than the Fury string. I've seen it first hand and that's why I don't use 8190 anymore.


Interesting based on your post of a year ago. 



Huntinsker said:


> I've made strings with 452x, 8190 and Fury for my compound, D97 and B55 for my trad bows, and have had equally desirable results with all 3. The peep sits straight and draws perfectly straight. The I just replaced an 8190 string that I had on for a year. I shot it 10 times and then installed the peep. It didn't move a degree in that entire year. I still have the set as a back up actually. I started making my own strings so that I could control the quality and the properties of the string. After getting a "perfect set" I don't think I could ever stand to have someone else build one for me. If you'd like to learn, there is a lot of info on here about string building. I have a thread that Automan26 and I put together in the DIY section. It'll take you step by step through the process and even show you how to build an affordable jig.


----------



## smokin12ring (Dec 4, 2002)

mongopino915 said:


> Can you elaborate on durability (like after 5000 shots) with regards to fuzz and overall visual/appearance between the two
> Both materials hold up extremely well, appearance will go to fury in my eyes. But honestly me and my brother both shoot semi pro at the Asa's and I can't tell you how many people complement his bow strings. My bow is on the same range and I get about half the comments. He has x and I have fury and there the exact same color. Between the 2 of us 5000 shots would be the break in period, I have no clue how many shots are on those strings but they hold up way better than they should for both materials.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Interesting based on your post of a year ago.


I meant my peep didn't move a degree, the string stretched nearly 1/4" so I twisted it back to the length I had it and used it as a backup, it's since found it's way to the trash. The only reason I use 8190 now is for recurve strings and experimentation when I don't want to waste my good materials.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

Thought I'd give a little update on one of my Fury strings. I'm switching nocks to the Gold Tip GTO nock and my .021 62xs center serving was too big and made the nock fit too tight with the new nocks. So I took the string off my bow, removed the peep and then measured at 100lbs. The string is EXACTLY THE SAME LENGTH as when I put it on the bow back in October. Dead nuts on 62 1/8". This is my target bow and I'm getting ready for a the state games 900 round in a couple weeks and then the state games of America 900 round later in the summer so I've got a lot of shots through the bow and in pretty high heat already this summer. Needless to say, I'm pretty pleased with that performance.

Here's a picture of it where I took the serving off so you can see that the Flo Orange pins didn't fade at all either.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> I meant my peep didn't move a degree, the string stretched nearly 1/4" so I twisted it back to the length I had it and used it as a backup, it's since found it's way to the trash. The only reason I use 8190 now is for recurve strings and experimentation when I don't want to waste my good materials.


I'm sorry, it's just hard to determine whether you were fibbing then or now?



Huntinsker said:


> ...I've made strings with 452x, 8190 and Fury for my compound, D97 and B55 for my trad bows, and have had equally desirable results with all 3...


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> ...Not sure who "the expert" is but if you're referring to me, I don't get anything for free and I'm not a "know-all, be-all" for any product. I know a lot about a lot of things that I use or work with all the time but I'm not getting any sort of free ride from anyone...


Another interesting quote... actually from this thread. Do you just make this stuff up as you go?



Huntinsker said:


> I haven't used X on my bows but I've had 3 sets of Fury on them since I got my sample from Brownell. The first set I made never budged after being put on the bow. I shot it for spring turkey and all summer and it stayed exactly the same. No peep rotation, no creep and my tune never changed. The 2 newer sets are exactly the same. They've got a lot of shooting on them and they look brand new and have not crept a bit. 2 of the sets have had Flo Orange in them and neither have shown any fade to the color.
> 
> Like I said, I can't personally speak to X's long term qualities but Fury has been outstanding for me.


So if I understand it, you've made 3 strings total with this product... and they were made from a "free" sample.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I'm sorry, it's just hard to determine whether you were fibbing then or now?


You can determine whatever you want. I'm telling you the truth because I have nothing to lose or gain either way. I'm not paid by any company and I'm not giving my opinion for any other reason than to help others learn about their materials. All my opinions and findings are honest because I'm a grown man and I pride myself on my integrity. You can decide whether or not you want to trust me and either way, no skin off my nose.

Now about your integrity.........

If you actually read the thread that you pulled my quote from, you'll see that I was directly responding to someone asking if their PEEP ROTATION could be caused by the maker using 8190 string material to build his threads. So like I said, I was talking about peep rotation and NOT creep or stretch of the materials. 

So you can take my quotes out of context and twist them to whatever you want. I'll rest easy knowing the truth. 

If anyone else wants to read and decide for yourself who has a "fibbing problem", here's the thread that EPLC quoted me from. Start at post #31 and read the conversation between me and Elvis_Is_Dead to see exactly what it was that I was saying. http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showt...8190+Fury+for+compound,+D97+B55+for+trad+bows


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> Another interesting quote... actually from this thread. Do you just make this stuff up as you go?
> 
> 
> 
> So if I understand it, you've made 3 strings total with this product... and they were made from a "free" sample.


That doesn't mean that I've only made 3 sets, that only means that I've had 3 sets on MY PERSONAL bows. I've made more sets for other people with great reports about their quality. It also doesn't mean that I've made 3 sets from a free sample, it just means that since the time I received my sample, I have put 3 sets on my bows. I have purchased several spools of material that I've built with since then. I got my sample over a year and half ago.

You can twist any words you want to try and discredit me. The only one looking like a fool is you.


----------



## highwaynorth (Feb 17, 2005)

This has been a good thread. I have learned that some archers are so good all they have left to worry about is the
molecular structure of their string and cables and that they refuse to believe the results of some of the best string
builders in the business. It's really not a life altering decision. If you haven't tried Fury, try it. if you don't
like it, go back to whatever you was using before. I tried Fury and so far it seems to be pretty good stuff. No
fuzzing, extremely stable and just a tad faster. Maybe 1 or 2 fps at most. Hardly worth noting.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> That doesn't mean that I've only made 3 sets, that only means that I've had 3 sets on MY PERSONAL bows. I've made more sets for other people with great reports about their quality. It also doesn't mean that I've made 3 sets from a free sample, it just means that since the time I received my sample, I have put 3 sets on my bows. I have purchased several spools of material that I've built with since then. I got my sample over a year and half ago.
> 
> You can twist any words you want to try and discredit me. The only one looking like a fool is you.


I've twisted no words... they were all yours and not taken out of context. You said you had no issues with any of these products and now you do. Interesting contradiction, that's all.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I've twisted no words... they were all yours and not taken out of context. You said you had no issues with any of these products and now you do. Interesting contradiction, that's all.


Again, context is everything. I was clearly saying that I have had equal results with all 3 materials when it comes to peep rotation. That's what that entire conversation was about......peep rotation. The conversation was not about the creep characteristics of the materials so I never mentioned that. It is true that my peep did not rotate with the 8190 string but it is also true that it crept nearly 1/4". 

Read through that conversation and then ask yourself if you didn't take it out of context.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

Huntinsker said:


> Again, context is everything. I was clearly saying that I have had equal results with all 3 materials when it comes to peep rotation. That's what that entire conversation was about......peep rotation. The conversation was not about the creep characteristics of the materials so I never mentioned that. It is true that my peep did not rotate with the 8190 string but it is also true that it crept nearly 1/4".
> 
> Read through that conversation and then ask yourself if you didn't take it out of context.


I took nothing out of context. You had absolutely zero complaints with 8190 back then in these postings or anywhere else. Common sense would tell anyone with any degree of reasonability that there was no issue with 8190 or you would have mentioned it somewhere? If you did then please provide the link. The fact is that you actually praised 8190 in that series of postings with no mention of creep issues. Had you had any issues then, I'm sure you would have posted all about them, you're not exactly shy about these things.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

EPLC said:


> I took nothing out of context. You had absolutely zero complaints with 8190 back then in these postings or anywhere else. Common sense would tell anyone with any degree of reasonability that there was no issue with 8190 or you would have mentioned it somewhere? If you did then please provide the link. The fact is that you actually praised 8190 in that series of postings with no mention of creep issues. Had you had any issues then, I'm sure you would have posted all about them, you're not exactly shy about these things.


This is all I'm going to say on this. I have no idea what posts you're referring to where I praise 8190 but I probably did. It was a decent material and I was happy with it for a very short time. The honeymoon phase was over very quickly. I didn't even realize that the string had crept nearly 1/4" until I took it off the bow. That was the last time I used 8190 on a bow of mine or anyone else's. The peep didn't rotate and I liked how the bow felt at the shot with 8190. I get the same peep performance but more stability with other materials. 

You can assume all you want about what you think I should have posted but again, what you think has no bearing what I think or do or on reality in general. I think you should post an apology for some of the crap you've tried to pull in the last several posts here but what I think probably has about as much bearing on what you think as you do on me. Good luck with your witch hunt. I hope you have fun.


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

EPLC said:


> I took nothing out of context. You had absolutely zero complaints with 8190 back then in these postings or anywhere else. Common sense would tell anyone with any degree of reasonability that there was no issue with 8190 or you would have mentioned it somewhere? If you did then please provide the link. The fact is that you actually praised 8190 in that series of postings with no mention of creep issues. Had you had any issues then, I'm sure you would have posted all about them, you're not exactly shy about these things.


I'm not trying to join in on the I said you said discussion you have going on here but I think this has gotten way off track from the op= bcy x and fury user findings


----------



## KiwiMaoriBoii69 (Jan 30, 2011)

bryanroberts said:


> I'm not trying to join in on the I said you said discussion you have going on here but I think this has gotten way off track from the op= bcy x and fury user findings


Couldn't agree more ...enjoy the thread just not the BS ..but then again being passionate is about standing your ground on what one believes but ..that should be another post entirely name "Stop talking ****" ..  other than that I will take each point if it feels valid to me to experiment with to satisfy my own findings ..so please on with the show as posted by bryanroberts


----------



## deadduck357 (Dec 29, 2013)

bryanroberts said:


> I'm not trying to join in on the I said you said discussion you have going on here but I think this has gotten way off track from the op= bcy x and fury user findings


100% in agreement.


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

I thought this thread was about the attributes of BCY-X vs Fury and not some pissin' match ..... Like I said earlier, I went with 60x and BCY-x because I didnt have time to wait for Tony219 and his 3-4 week back up....when I get the extra cash and time to wait, I'll get a set of Fury from him and put on the back up Bowtech .... I'm guessin' from what Ive read here the main difference between the two is just looks..I dont bel;ieve for a second that just by going to Fury I'll pick up 10 fps either, the only way that may happen is the tune and specs of the bow would change....not via the material its made out of....


----------



## highwaynorth (Feb 17, 2005)

I like Meat said:


> I thought this thread was about the attributes of BCY-X vs Fury and not some pissin' match ..... Like I said earlier, I went with 60x and BCY-x because I didnt have time to wait for Tony219 and his 3-4 week back up....when I get the extra cash and time to wait, I'll get a set of Fury from him and put on the back up Bowtech .... I'm guessin' from what Ive read here the main difference between the two is just looks..I dont bel;ieve for a second that just by going to Fury I'll pick up 10 fps either, the only way that may happen is the tune and specs of the bow would change....not via the material its made out of....


I sure never picked up 10fps when I put a set of Tony's on my Invasion. 1 or 2fps at most. Fury does look good and don't fuzz.
I'm sure BCY X is just as stable and wouldn't hesitate to use that either.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

bryanroberts said:


> I'm not trying to join in on the I said you said discussion you have going on here but I think this has gotten way off track from the op= bcy x and fury user findings


If you take away the GORE, 8190 and Fury are the same material - SK90 (or so stated). The poster had made several derogatory statements about 8190 while praising Fury in this thread. When I look back at posting history (which is apparently now being re-written) the poster had no issues with 8190... until now... although he hasn't actually used 8190 since he was praising it. Just confused... that's all. There has also been very little mention of cable stability, mostly strings. Strings have the least amount of stress in a compound bow. The cables are the only true measure of the stability of a material. I recently removed a SK78 cable from a 60# Conquest 4 that was over two years old and found it to be within the original spec. I don't think that can be improved on.

All of todays modern materials, regardless of material company, are better than anything we have had at our disposal in the past. Still, the blended materials have proven to be more stable than the non-blended materials. While some non-blended materials are very good, the "real" archery bow engineers have chosen blended over non-blended because it is time tested to be the best. Bow companies have to deal with extreme conditions, radicle cam designs, big poundage bows and long draw lengths and can not afford to mess around with the thousands and thousands of problems that could pop up. They, the true experts, have decided which is best and they have said this loud and clear over the test of time.

Now, this is not to say that the non-blended materials are not good, as they are. Fury, 8190 and BCY-X are SK90. SK90 is a very small diameter material that requires more strands than a larger diameter material. This small diameter can cause issues if there is too much wax on the strands. The smaller the diameter of the material, the bigger this issue can be. Early runs of 8190 had too much wax and I believe this was the reason some folks had creep issues, especially in warm conditions. Wax between the strands will be displaced, it has to. The smaller the diameter the more wax needs to move. I do not believe this was as much a material issue as a wax displacement issue. The larger diameter materials such as SK78 and SK75, etc., do not have this issue, or at least it is not as noticeable. Anyone choosing to use any of these small diameter materials should order "low wax" to avoid any wax displacement issues.


----------



## deadduck357 (Dec 29, 2013)

eplc said:


> if you take away the gore, 8190 and fury are the same material - sk90 (or so stated). The poster had made several derogatory statements about 8190 while praising fury in this thread. When i look back at posting history (which is apparently now being re-written) the poster had no issues with 8190... Until now... Although he hasn't actually used 8190 since he was praising it. Just confused... That's all. There has also been very little mention of cable stability, mostly strings. Strings have the least amount of stress in a compound bow. The cables are the only true measure of the stability of a material. I recently removed a sk78 cable from a 60# conquest 4 that was over two years old and found it to be within the original spec. I don't think that can be improved on.
> 
> All of todays modern materials, regardless of material company, are better than anything we have had at our disposal in the past. Still, the blended materials have proven to be more stable than the non-blended materials. While some non-blended materials are very good, the "real" archery bow engineers have chosen blended over non-blended because it is time tested to be the best. Bow companies have to deal with extreme conditions, radicle cam designs, big poundage bows and long draw lengths and can not afford to mess around with the thousands and thousands of problems that could pop up. They, the true experts, have decided which is best and they have said this loud and clear over the test of time.
> 
> Now, this is not to say that the non-blended materials are not good, as they are. Fury, 8190 and bcy-x are sk90. Sk90 is a very small diameter material that requires more strands than a larger diameter material. This small diameter can cause issues if there is too much wax on the strands. The smaller the diameter of the material, the bigger this issue can be. Early runs of 8190 had too much wax and i believe this was the reason some folks had creep issues, especially in warm conditions. Wax between the strands will be displaced, it has to. The smaller the diameter the more wax needs to move. I do not believe this was as much a material issue as a wax displacement issue. The larger diameter materials such as sk78 and sk75, etc., do not have this issue, or at least it is not as noticeable. Anyone choosing to use any of these small diameter materials should order "low wax" to avoid any wax displacement issues.


ok.


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

What about "waxing" the Fury and X materials AFTER they are on a bow, both cables and String...Ive always used Tex Tite on the WC strings Ive had....there was a thread on here someplace about string cable cleaners/wax(?)....is good 'ol Tex Tite still used on these newer materials or do you "have" to use some of this newer stuff ? Since X has an extra fiber(Vectran ?) that fuzzes some, wouldnt Tex Tite wax keep that down and the material smooth and water proof, esp. in a wet hunting situation ? You sure dont want the cabls and string absorbing moisture in a snow/rain/cold situation...I mean the bow just hangs there for hours just waiting for that one shot.....


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I like Meat said:


> What about "waxing" the Fury and X materials AFTER they are on a bow, both cables and String...Ive always used Tex Tite on the WC strings Ive had....there was a thread on here someplace about string cable cleaners/wax(?)....it good 'ol tex tite still used on these newer materials or do you "have" to use some of this newer stuff ? Since X has an extra fiber(Vectran ?) that fuzzes some, wouldnt tex tite wax keep that down ?


I use Bohning Seal Tite with good results.


----------



## I like Meat (Feb 14, 2009)

Is there a major difference between the "seal" and the regular Tex Tite ??.....


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

EPLC said:


> Anyone choosing to use any of these small diameter materials should order "low wax" to avoid any wax displacement issues.


 Does Bcy or Brownell sell "regular" wax as a standard if nothing is stated in the order?


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

I like Meat said:


> Is there a major difference between the "seal" and the regular Tex Tite ??.....


Text tite is a natural wax and Seal tite is a silicone based wax that has no odor and is supposed to protect from the elements, especially water, better. Not sure what type of wax Text tite is.


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

bryanroberts said:


> Does Bcy or Brownell sell "regular" wax as a standard if nothing is stated in the order?


I believe so. I remember reading where someone was paying a little more for "low wax" stuff so I'm assuming they'd sell the "regular wax" stuff for the regular price.


----------



## deadduck357 (Dec 29, 2013)

Huntinsker said:


> I use Bohning Seal Tite with good results.


Has anyone tried Scorpion Venom with Fury and if so how did it fare?


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

I like Meat said:


> What about "waxing" the Fury and X materials AFTER they are on a bow, both cables and String...Ive always used Tex Tite on the WC strings Ive had....there was a thread on here someplace about string cable cleaners/wax(?)....is good 'ol Tex Tite still used on these newer materials or do you "have" to use some of this newer stuff ? Since X has an extra fiber(Vectran ?) that fuzzes some, wouldnt Tex Tite wax keep that down and the material smooth and water proof, esp. in a wet hunting situation ? You sure dont want the cabls and string absorbing moisture in a snow/rain/cold situation...I mean the bow just hangs there for hours just waiting for that one shot.....


Tex Tite is fine and should not produce any negative effects. With regard to "low wax" orders; I do not believe there is a premium for this as I've never heard that one before. With regard to water proofing I wouldn't worry too much about that as these materials are very water resistant/repellant. The wax will prevent water from getting between the strands but the materials themselves will not absorb water. Wax is more to keep the string lubricated so it doesn't fray. Btw, they all fray up if they are abused, some worst than others. I find the GORE in 8190 works quite well as a dry lubricant.


----------



## Twisted X Bowstrings (Mar 23, 2013)

Huntinsker said:


> I believe so. I remember reading where someone was paying a little more for "low wax" stuff so I'm assuming they'd sell the "regular wax" stuff for the regular price.


You can buy low wax material from Bcy. It costs a little more because you actually get more string material due to the fact that they sell the material by the 1/4lb. or 1lb. spools. The weight of the wax isn't included so to get the weight they add more thread.


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

I posted this earlier , trying to do what you asked for...But somehow the info gets glossed over and folks are "over come" by shiny objects and fuzz??? Below are the attributes of both blended and unblended products...The difference , really between the finished materials and how they look is the Dye/Wax...One company uses a solvent based dye, the other uses a water based...What's underneath that dye is the same SK90 is SK90 all day long...BCY Advertises that its SK90, but it wasn't until this thread that we found out that Brownell also uses SK90 

So Take the Gore out of 8190 and you have Fury, Take the Vectran out of X and you have Fury....Put Vectran in Fury and you have X, put Gore in Fury and you have 8190...That's if we assume that Fury is in fact SK90...

The two materials (X and Fury) are not apples to apples ..."X" is closer to Xcel and 452X, which by all accounts is still the most used, sold and probably the most winning material on the Planet to this day...Name one top 10 Pro that isn't using some sort of a blended product...BCY or Brownell , I don't care what company it is, its just a plain ole fact that pros are going to eliminate or try to eliminate any chance of movement on their bows when the stakes are high...

And to say that using a blended material is overkill and a non blended material is good enough for our applications is just plain ludicrous...

No one is saying that either material is bad, I'm just stating that the facts are out there on the attributes of both materials ...And if we are really honest with our selves, look at the data, strip away the fancy pictures and look what's underneath the shiny coatings...We will conclude that Blended Products are and have been more stable than an unblended product, any day, all day ....period

So below are attributes of Blended (x) unblended (fury) also click on the link below in my post , lost of good info there also 




I like Meat said:


> I thought this thread was about the attributes of BCY-X vs Fury and not some pissin' match .....





ex-wolverine said:


> Like I said before and these are not my words , it's proven science ....
> 
> people can gloss over it all they want
> 
> ...


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Well i guess we are still beating this horse............ I find it amusing and intriguing that all the experts of FURY are people who have VERY little to no experience with the material......... X is not a bad material at all, probably one of the best materials BCY has put out. However, just because it has vectran does not make it more stable than FURY....... What intrigues me Tom, is that 8190 has proven to grown in heat, have stability issues etc. If we go by your theory if we take out the Gore, we have FURY. Correct? So what you are saying is that the Gore is what makes the 8190 stretch, have temp issues etc??? Now, it has been stated the Gore is for abrasion resistance / fuzzing...... But yet, FURY fuzzes less. My mind is blown!! Use the fury, the results speak for themselves....

On another note, bowstring is not made to fuzz and it is not fuzzy when its manufactured at the factory. So saying it is solely "cosmetic" is not 100% true. It is some break down of fibers.




ex-wolverine said:


> I posted this earlier , trying to do what you asked for...But somehow the info gets glossed over and folks are "over come" by shiny objects and fuzz??? Below are the attributes of both blended and unblended products...The difference , really between the finished materials and how they look is the Dye/Wax...One company uses a solvent based dye, the other uses a water based...What's underneath that dye is the same SK90 is SK90 all day long...BCY Advertises that its SK90, but it wasn't until this thread that we found out that Brownell also uses SK90
> 
> So Take the Gore out of 8190 and you have Fury, Take the Vectran out of X and you have Fury....Put Vectran in Fury and you have X, put Gore in Fury and you have 8190...That's if we assume that Fury is in fact SK90...
> 
> ...


----------



## Huntinsker (Feb 9, 2012)

sniper10177 said:


> You can buy low wax material from Bcy. It costs a little more because you actually get more string material due to the fact that they sell the material by the 1/4lb. or 1lb. spools. The weight of the wax isn't included so to get the weight they add more thread.


That's what I thought. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2357282&highlight=fury+sk90

Also above is a link from November of 2014 stating that Fury is sk90, so again this is not the first time its been brought up.




ex-wolverine said:


> I posted this earlier , trying to do what you asked for...But somehow the info gets glossed over and folks are "over come" by shiny objects and fuzz??? Below are the attributes of both blended and unblended products...The difference , really between the finished materials and how they look is the Dye/Wax...One company uses a solvent based dye, the other uses a water based...What's underneath that dye is the same SK90 is SK90 all day long...BCY Advertises that its SK90, but it wasn't until this thread that we found out that Brownell also uses SK90
> 
> So Take the Gore out of 8190 and you have Fury, Take the Vectran out of X and you have Fury....Put Vectran in Fury and you have X, put Gore in Fury and you have 8190...That's if we assume that Fury is in fact SK90...
> 
> ...


----------



## ex-wolverine (Dec 31, 2004)

Brownell said:


> Well i guess we are still beating this horse............ I find it amusing and intriguing that all the experts of FURY are people who have VERY little to no experience with the material......... X is not a bad material at all, probably one of the best materials BCY has put out. However, just because it has vectran does not make it more stable than FURY....... What intrigues me Tom, is that 8190 has proven to grown in heat, have stability issues etc. If we go by your theory if we take out the Gore, we have FURY. Correct? So what you are saying is that the Gore is what makes the 8190 stretch, have temp issues etc??? Now, it has been stated the Gore is for abrasion resistance / fuzzing...... But yet, FURY fuzzes less. My mind is blown!! Use the fury, the results speak for themselves....
> 
> On another note, bowstring is not made to fuzz and it is not fuzzy when its manufactured at the factory. So saying it is solely "cosmetic" is not 100% true. It is some break down of fibers.


Rob 
Don't go there on experience with certain products ., hell Im still plastered / flattered I'm still on your web page ....long before you came along 

Take the gore out of 8190 use the same number of strands fury and sk90 so they are they same diameter then do the test 

If you use the same diameter now , you will infact have more strands fury than 8190 so how is that fair ??!

gore does nothing for stability its only added for lubrication so to speak and adds to the denier size... 

You still never answered my question if Fury was more stable than VTX or Xcel

Crickets I believe was the term

Every thread I posted in I have posted empirical data while some have posted " cause I say so" 

Like Fox News , I report you decide ...I never once said fury was bad and I never claimed 8190 was better ...just blended / unblended 

So what , Vectran fuzzes , Dyneema don't .. If fuzz stops a person from using a more stable material then I can't say anymore 

Again that data I posted isn't mine ... It's all out there for us to read ... I'm just bringing it to logical forefront


----------



## Brownell (May 2, 2011)

Tom, didn't have any personal digs in there no need to start. However I am going to point out that your opinion on blended/ non blended materials is that, an opinion and not fact as it comes across. I thought I did reply to the Xcel vs. VTX but with all the fury threads it gets mixed together :thumbs_up. Fury has proven to be more stable than 452x and Xcel, so yes I would say it is. I have no comments on VTX as I have not built with it as it is an exclusive material to Vaportrail. If you would like more info on VTX you can call up and speak with Steve, Rick or Ears. 

That's really all I have to say without reiterating the point over and over again. 





ex-wolverine said:


> Rob
> Don't go there on experience with certain products ., hell Im still plastered / flattered I'm still on your web page ....long before you came along
> 
> Take the gore out of 8190 use the same number of strands fury and sk90 so they are they same diameter then do the test
> ...


----------



## spurlow (Oct 11, 2010)

I've been trying to read some intelligent information. EPLC stop acting like you have bcy stuck up your rectum


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

spurlow said:


> I've been trying to read some intelligent information. EPLC stop acting like you have bcy stuck up your rectum


Now that was an intelligent post! You should contribute more of your unbiased opinions. Oh, I notice Hogwire is on your buddy list... Just saying


----------



## spurlow (Oct 11, 2010)

Actually Bob Destin is a friend of mine also as well as a cast of others. And I have had strings built with both. There is people enjoying this post and you're doing a good job of screwing it up


----------



## spurlow (Oct 11, 2010)

Just saying


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

spurlow said:


> Actually Bob Destin is a friend of mine also as well as a cast of others. And I have had strings built with both. There is people enjoying this post and you're doing a good job of screwing it up


Yep, just another unbiased AT user looking for information... just saying 



spurlow said:


> It's Brownell fury, any questions just p.m. Rob and he will answer them. He builds strings for my customers bows and myself and I have no complaints.





spurlow said:


> I'm using Brownell fury material per Rob. Idk the strand count cause I never question him on that when he builds all my customers strings. I'm running about 2fps over factory.The bow seems softer on the shot than the stock strings


----------



## whack n stack (Dec 23, 2007)

Tom, I really appreciate all the technical data you bring to the table on the subject.

It is in fact, scientific, empirical data, that gives us the wisdom we seek to settle any debate. Hearsay and opinions don't cut the mustard.


----------



## spurlow (Oct 11, 2010)

So you want to pull up where I use Hoyt strings and winners choice researcher.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

spurlow said:


> So you want to pull up where I use Hoyt strings and winners choice researcher.


Hey, you are the one slinging mud... and with a financial connection to Brownell to boot. Seems to be a trend throughout this entire thread... Just saying


----------



## bryanroberts (Mar 1, 2014)

I don't know why we have all these lil comments popping up from the peanut gallery anyway? ex wolverine, Rob, eplc, and a couple others have l pretty much stuck to either fact based or opinion based comments to help this discussion along and provide info to everyone and it's a shame that it has to get personal.. just sayin


----------



## spurlow (Oct 11, 2010)

It's not personal what so ever. I have been enjoying this thread from the beginning. I have used all these materials when I have had 1,000s of strings made. I know of certain things these strings do in this Florida climate unlike other areas. If a string can live through the florida sun then you have a good string. I will say this that some of the information is opinionated and some is fact. I do like bcy products and have used them for a long time and still use them. Also I use Brownell Fury and I really love the way it performs or behaves on the bow. When setting up bows I have noticed the fury stabilizes faster than bcy x. This may be due to the builder but any time I've used bcy after installing it takes longer to settle in. That's my opinion. But I still use both materials.


----------



## EPLC (May 21, 2002)

spurlow said:


> I've been trying to read some intelligent information. EPLC stop acting like you have bcy stuck up your rectum


Btw, this is personal...


----------



## JHENS87 (Nov 7, 2009)

This thread is done. No need to continue to bicker back and forth. Debating the 2 products is ok, but going after each other on a personal level and dragging others into it isn't going to happen


----------

