# Easton Handheld Bow Scale - no longer in production



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

Just an FYI. For those who are judges, want to be a judge in the future, or just want one of these items as an accessory - better get one now.

Easton seems to have quietly discontinued the Handheld Bow Scale - popular with judges and other people to ensure that their compound bows are within FITA spec. I spoke with Easton a few minutes ago and they have no plans in the interim to introduce a replacement.

So - be aware that if you want one or need one for your judging career, snag one now.

Lancaster and Bass Pro are both out of stock. So - you may have to source one outside of those two suppliers.

FYI - Steve


----------



## jim e (Jun 28, 2015)

Beastmaster said:


> Just an FYI. For those who are judges, want to be a judge in the future, or just want one of these items as an accessory - better get one now.
> 
> Easton seems to have quietly discontinued the Handheld Bow Scale - popular with judges and other people to ensure that their compound bows are within FITA spec. I spoke with Easton a few minutes ago and they have no plans in the interim to introduce a replacement.
> 
> ...


My Easton Bow scale just stopped functioning. 
Is there any place I can get another Easton Bow scale, either used or new. I have checked everywhere.
Any help is appreciated. Jim


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

Jim, good luck finding someone willing to part with one.

The ones on the market right now are all about the same. Pick one of those up right now. Cabelas makes a good one. Unless Easton decides to rerelease it or someone duplicates it we are using something like this.

http://www.cabelas.com/product/Cabe...z_l=Header%3BSearch-All+Products&Ntt=bowscale


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

RickBac said:


> Jim, good luck finding someone willing to part with one.
> 
> The ones on the market right now are all about the same. Pick one of those up right now. Cabelas makes a good one. Unless Easton decides to rerelease it or someone duplicates it we are using something like this.
> 
> http://www.cabelas.com/product/Cabe...z_l=Header%3BSearch-All+Products&Ntt=bowscale


This seems like a problem for judges. The Easton scale was specifically designed to record peak weight and was purpose built for archery, and for archery shop use. The alternate scales are not, even though they may say "bow scale" on their housing. There's something that seems less than ideal when internationally certified FITA Judges must judge using scales that aren't legal to use to so much as to weigh and sell me a grapefruit at a farmer's market because they aren't certified, or certifiable, scales - not that retail certification is the end all in weight standards certification.

From some of the reviews on the Cabela's site:



> I have used this on several of my bows. Its accurate to a point but not as accurate as a high quality version. Several of my bows varied by 2-5 pounds. Decent for the DIY folks.





> I bought this scale despite the negative reviews of some. I found the scale to be accurate from the box, although it does vary minimally when tared, but not enough to matter. This is not a precision reloading scale where a few grains can make the difference.





> Not accurate





> I do see some inconsistencies in readings, but that is most likely do to pulling by hand. But for the most part readings tend to be what I feel like is accurate and within a pound or two of previous readings.



The scale Cabela's sells for $20 appears to be nearly identical to $8 commodity fishing scales you can buy off of amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00B301MPI/

The Cabela's version has a hook more appropriate to bow testing and is a relatively reasonable deal at $20 (and it may have some different modes or features than the standard model, such as peak weight lock), though the basic scale costs as little as $1.47 wholesale:

http://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/50kg-10g-Portable-Digital-Scale-Fishing_1080070387.html

Regardless, of wholesale cost, Cabala's scale is much more reasonable than the X-Spot "bow scale" - which is also a cheap Chinese scale repackaged, and re-priced, for archery. X-Spot doesn't even change the hook and costs $50. 

Reviews of the X-Spot scale on Lancaster Archery:



> This stuff should be called "Random Number Generator" instead of Bow Scale. Accuracy 0,05 lb ??? Maybe in another Universe. Four measurements of the same bow - 62,1 / 64,9 / 65,7 / 63,6 .... I wouldn't buy it again .. 50 bucks wasted ... now looking for another scale.





> While pulling on my bow to check draw weight,the bar holding the hook broke and sent the parts into the linoleum floor like a bullet and something whacked the back of my hand by my thumb which caused me to utter sweet words to the piece of %#@&. After I regained my composer the next week, I noticed that it looked like somebody shot a hole in the floor and I commented to the pro shop owner and he replied that was the damage from the piece of u know what scale . I examined the piece that broke and the quality of the metal was jepardised by the way they cut the metal lengthwise, very thin and jagged . I have worked with metal for 30 years and I hope they can fix the rest of their scales right now they are dangerous and should be recalled


You can see the regular version of the "$50" X-Spot here on Amazon for around $7:

http://www.amazon.com/Sienoc-Digital-Portable-Hanging-Luggage/dp/B00ENH8I0A/

(and, of course, they can be bought wholesale for a few dollars each, just like the base model of the scale Cabela's uses)

Given all of the above, it seems like there is a real need for an accurate, professional scale for FITA judges and that current re-badged commodity digital fishing scales are not of sufficient quality or accuracy for FITA judging purposes.


----------



## jim e (Jun 28, 2015)

Thanks for response.
My brother is a judge, and I was the one who broke his scale.
He told me I will not find another, but I thought I would ask the posters here, as with all the infor. on these boards here, I thought that there may be an outside chance that someone would have this scale they would have no use for or would be willing to part with for the $, or know of a decent replacement would be available for use in judging.

Like Warbow commented " it seems like there is a real need for an accurate, professional scale for FITA judges and that current re-badged commodity digital fishing scales are not of sufficient quality or accuracy for FITA judging purposes."


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

The cabelas one our club has is very accurate. Still, nothing is nice as the old easton scale.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

RickBac said:


> The cabelas one our club has is very accurate. Still, nothing is nice as the old easton scale.


Good to know, but it may also be the case that accuracy varies from unit to unit, as might be expected from a $2 wholesale device - variability being a reason why certifications are needed for scales used to measure things that matter, to sift through devices that are and are not accurate, as you have, in effect, done yourself by testing your particular unit.

I do suspect, though, that some of the variability in the reviews comes from off axis hand pulling, ie. torquing. Using a drawing board or a linkage that prevents torque during hand drawing should eliminate that problem. (And, of course, the issue of "ballistic" drawing which is not a problem of the scale itself but rather the loads inherent in the drawing technique - that is, if you jerk the string back you're going to get higher peak loads than if you draw back smoothly and consistently - another issue that can be remedied by the use of a draw board.)


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

the "smiley scales" definitely are not as consistent or convenient to use as the Easton scales.

the Easton ones were made by PACT, who apparently chose to discontinue them - probably not enough demand, especially at the price.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

caspian said:


> the "smiley scales" definitely are not as consistent or convenient to use as the Easton scales.
> 
> the Easton ones were made by PACT, who apparently chose to discontinue them - probably not enough demand, especially at the price.


I suppose it is kind of hard to compete with an accurate $150 scale when a $7 - $50 one is "good enough" for most people.

Turns out FITA doesn't have very strict standards when it comes to the scales that are the arbiters of whether a compound will be DQed.

From the judge's manual:



> Unless your scale is recently certified, you
> may accept a tolerance of 1 lb, if a bow is checked that is within one pound of maximum, it is advisable to re-check it.


I'm going to assume they mean -/+ 1 pound @ 60, or +/- 1.7%. Just saying +/- a pound is a really sloppy standard. You have to say at what weight or percentage of load capacity. -/+ 1 pound at 5 pounds is -/+ 20% :mg:

(I'm not actually sure they are referring to an actual, measured scale tolerance, though, or, instead, an indirect assumption of a +/- tolerance in *judging*, using an assumed scale tolerance of +/- 1 pound, rather than an actual measured scale tolerance of +/- 1 pound.)

The OP should put a WTB ad in the FITA Classifieds - it could happen :dontknow:

I know someone who has one and doesn't use it much, but it is a nice, and hard to replace, piece of kit, so there is no way he'd easily part with it.


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Usually where there is a need, someone fills it in. I hope LAS can step up and figure something out! Of course you have to remember that archery is a rather niche sport...we shall see. I wouldn't buy anything that has an off brand name on it...just saying' Made In America = best quality


it seems like there is a real need for an accurate, professional scale for FITA judges and that current re-badged commodity digital fishing scales are not of sufficient quality or accuracy for FITA judging purposes.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

Maybe a handheld luggage scale like this:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...z4JlVs3ALnlZa4vRPJQ_lJzkDcSK5AGS_3xoCtg_w_wcB


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

It would be easy to adapt a safety type hook on this


----------



## lizard (Jul 4, 2003)

Interesting....



Bob Furman said:


> Maybe a handheld luggage scale like this:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...z4JlVs3ALnlZa4vRPJQ_lJzkDcSK5AGS_3xoCtg_w_wcB


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

Or leave as is since it is rated at 110#.


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

The strap might make it hard for a short person to draw a long draw length bow though.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Bob Furman said:


> Maybe a handheld luggage scale like this:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...z4JlVs3ALnlZa4vRPJQ_lJzkDcSK5AGS_3xoCtg_w_wcB


One of the issues for FITA judges is that the scale has to capture peak weight*, as the bow is pulled over the cam, rather than settled weight after a few seconds of static load (which would capture the holding weight). Luggage scales (and fish scales) tend to display settled weight. The Cabela's bow scale can record either, according to answers on the Cabela's product page (a feature which may be special to the Cabela's model of this commodity scale).


----------



## ccwilder3 (Sep 13, 2003)

I have one of the smiley face scales that measures peak weight. I have no issue getting repeat measurements within 0.20 of a pound. Your just have to draw the bow smoothly and at the same pace each time.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Anyone use a company like this to have their spring or electronic bow scale calibrated? http://nationalcalibration.com/w/services/?capabilities


----------



## Bob Furman (May 16, 2012)

Warbow said:


> One of the issues for FITA judges is that the scale has to capture peak weight*, as the bow is pulled over the cam, rather than settled weight after a few seconds of static load (which would capture the holding weight). Luggage scales (and fish scales) tend to display settled weight. The Cabela's bow scale can record either, according to answers on the Cabela's product page (a feature which may be special to the Cabela's model of this commodity scale).


I'm not 100% sure on this scale, awaiting reply from them. Most of the smaller scales at Lancaster could easily be made to work such as the X-Spot.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

i have one which i haven't used for some time and i removed the batteries but can't find them anymore...

does anyone know what size batteries they use?....they're the flat ones used in watches..


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

jmvargas said:


> i have one which i haven't used for some time and i removed the batteries but can't find them anymore...
> 
> does anyone know what size batteries they use?....they're the flat ones used in watches..


I have two D357H in mine.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

Seattlepop said:


> I have two D357H in mine.


thanks seattlepop!


----------



## toys (May 29, 2009)

Fixing a faulty easton bow scale

My easton bow scale stopped working properly several years ago, sporadically turning off or not registering the correct weight.

It turned out it was easy to fix. The problem on my scale was caused by the buttons. To fix, take the scale apart by removing the small screws. After you take it all apart you should notice that it is very well made, but the buttons are too squishy. I made a small gasket from ordinary paper, about 1 inch long and half inch wide, that fits under the buttons. It raises them up a bit and I also left the second button hole blocked (antenna), so that button can't trigger. Just make a hole in the paper for the power button and put it back together.


----------



## jim e (Jun 28, 2015)

toys said:


> Fixing a faulty easton bow scale
> 
> My easton bow scale stopped working properly several years ago, sporadically turning off or not registering the correct weight.
> 
> It turned out it was easy to fix. The problem on my scale was caused by the buttons. To fix, take the scale apart by removing the small screws. After you take it all apart you should notice that it is very well made, but the buttons are too squishy. I made a small gasket from ordinary paper, about 1 inch long and half inch wide, that fits under the buttons. It raises them up a bit and I also left the second button hole blocked (antenna), so that button can't trigger. Just make a hole in the paper for the power button and put it back together.


I dropped mine and dog got ahold of it, and its now worthless, and no fix. 
seems like enough of them sold, surprised they are no longer made.


----------



## macnimation (Nov 30, 2010)

Apparently world Archery judges deemed them to be too inaccurate and not consistent, and are no longer allowed to be used to test competition bows, so Easton pulled them...


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

macnimation said:


> Apparently world Archery judges deemed them to be too inaccurate and not consistent, and are no longer allowed to be used to test competition bows, so Easton pulled them...


Hm. I would love to find out which World Archery judges said that.


----------



## dchan (Jun 29, 2004)

If price is no object.. and accuracy is the primary thing they needed.. 

https://www.transducertechniques.com/hfg-force-gauge.aspx

These come in even more accurate systems.


----------



## dchan (Jun 29, 2004)

or if you want to get real crazy..

You can build 3 of these into a glove, and wire the glove up to take measurements for you.. (I guess you could make a tab too!)

https://www.tekscan.com/products-solutions/force-sensors/a301

How cool would that be!


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

dchan said:


> or if you want to get real crazy..
> 
> You can build 3 of these into a glove, and wire the glove up to take measurements for you.. (I guess you could make a tab too!)
> 
> ...


After reading your post my mind did one of those little trips it does sometimes. 

That could be a really cool diagnostic tool, not likely for the average joe, but for a training center of some sort. Add a couple sensors on the grip of the bow to determine palming or heeling. And of course integrated into the archery shoes to tell left/right front/back weight distribution. Get all of that to read on a tablet, and there would be some cool data.

Now, on the more practical side... possibly. Anybody smart enough to hack a WII out there?
Using the WII Fit balance board and routines that are already in there for balance and weight distribution (just need to get it to display continuously) you could get a real good idea of balance when shooting. Pair that up with a video feedback system and again a data head could have some fun.

Cheers


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

dchan said:


> If price is no object.. and accuracy is the primary thing they needed..
> 
> https://www.transducertechniques.com/hfg-force-gauge.aspx
> 
> These come in even more accurate systems.


Interesting. At that price I'm surprised that there is no data output. Bluetooth with an android app would be nice 

Also, if this $445 hand-held, industrial beast has a -/+ 1/2% accuracy what must the accuracy of the cheap commodity fishing scales be? :mg:



dchan said:


> or if you want to get real crazy..
> 
> You can build 3 of these into a glove, and wire the glove up to take measurements for you.. (I guess you could make a tab too!)
> 
> ...


Something like this would be fascinating - and it seems like the kind of thing that USAA should be doing but AFIK isn't. With all the talk about weight distribution for the hook, do we actually have any data on what people are really using, as opposed to what they *think* they are using? I'm not sure what sensors there are that could really take the U-bend of a finger hooking around the string, though. I suspect that though the company calls these sensors "flexible" that it is a relative term.


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

dchan said:


> or if you want to get real crazy..
> 
> You can build 3 of these into a glove, and wire the glove up to take measurements for you.. (I guess you could make a tab too!)
> 
> ...


I've actually been playing around with these and an Arduino to test arrow force against the plunger to test a theory. They're not incredibly accurate, but they do give you a peak into a 'hidden world'. Fun for us tinkerers.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

macnimation said:


> _Apparently_ world Archery judges deemed them to be too inaccurate and not consistent, and are no longer allowed to be used to test competition bows, so Easton pulled them...


What leads you to say this? Do you have a citation?

I can't find any specs for judges scales for compound archery, however, for flight archery, where bow weight is a key factor in the competition, the scales must be certified.


Book 5


> *34.5.6.3 Bow Weighing:*
> ...
> *Bow weighing scales or any other method of bow weighing equipment shall be tested within thirty days of the competition by a qualified agency and carry the stamp of this certification of accuracy;
> *When a drop weight-weighing device is used, the drop weights shall be made from an approved metal such as brass or steel (not lead) and be clearly marked as to each unit's weight value. The weights shall be tested by a Sealer of Weights or equal authority and shall carry the stamp of this test or certification.


----------



## macnimation (Nov 30, 2010)

I was told by a World Archery Judge at a World Cup Event when he used a spring bow press on my bow, and I asked about the Easton one. I have two of them and still use them anyway. Other than it is also a general knowledge thing. Maybe Easton might actually clarify themselves as they have never mentioned why they stopped making a very popular item?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

macnimation said:


> I was told by a World Archery Judge at a World Cup Event when he used a spring bow press on my bow, and I asked about the Easton one. I have two of them and still use them anyway. Other than it is also a general knowledge thing. Maybe Easton might actually clarify themselves as they have never mentioned why they stopped making a very popular item?


Thanks. 

I'm not a compound shooter, how was a spring bow press used? :dontknow: For target shooting, Judges aren't supposed to scale your bows. They are supposed to have you scale it.

From the World Archery Judge's Guidebook, 2012:



> Do not draw the bow yourself, but always have the archer draw his/her own bow.


Or am I missing something?

One thing I read over at http://www.archery-forum.com/showthread.php?26872-Digital-Bow-Scales is that the Easton scale can't be calibrated. Don't know if that is true, but it would be a potential problem if a judge wants to get their scale certified. If it is on the money, no problem, but if not, it, allegedly, can't be adjusted.


----------



## macnimation (Nov 30, 2010)

Yes, they always hand us the bow scales to draw it ourselves. But for the past 18 months, it had been a spring scale, which to me is not as accurate. Every spring scale has registered my bow as around 43 pounds when it is 59 on the Easton. I can only assume it might be that the Easton scale never gives the same result, usually a pound in deviation, which I consider acceptable.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

macnimation said:


> Yes, they always hand us the bow scales to draw it ourselves. But for the past 18 months, it had been a spring scale, which to me is not as accurate. *Every spring scale has registered my bow as around 43 pounds when it is 59 on the Easton*. I can only assume it might be that the Easton scale never gives the same result, usually a pound in deviation, which I consider acceptable.


:mg:

Was the spring scale this style?:









Because I'd think there is no way that those spring scales with the sticker for the graduations are as accurate as the Easton scale. I guess it's fine for you as a competitor as long as your bow passes, but I'd be really concerned if a judge's judgment is so off as to think that a scale that is almost certainly off by 16 pounds, or 27%, is accurate and sufficient for use in judging for competition. I certainly wouldn't be inclined to trust any of his other gauges or judgements - including his info on Easton scales. 

And, I guess if my bow passed I wouldn't bug the judge about his gear (who would want extra scrutiny from a judge?), however, I'm also inclined to wonder if that judge ever tested the scale on a certified 60 pound weight, or even on a weight checked on so much as a grocery scale. :dontknow:


----------



## macnimation (Nov 30, 2010)

Yup, it is that style. I hate the fiddly loop that goes through the dloop. It is just a process to go through but it is a concern that a bow of 70 pounds would get past the 60 pound limit, which has happened. Some of those spring scales don't measure the peak weight, only the holding weight.


----------



## Mormegil (Jan 26, 2012)

bobnikon said:


> Now, on the more practical side... possibly. Anybody smart enough to hack a WII out there?
> Using the WII Fit balance board and routines that are already in there for balance and weight distribution (just need to get it to display continuously) you could get a real good idea of balance when shooting. Pair that up with a video feedback system and again a data head could have some fun.
> 
> Cheers


http://www.stavros.io/posts/your-weight-online/

I didn't do an extensive search but it looks like there's already a wii board hacking community out there so what you want is probably doable.


----------



## gster123 (Dec 17, 2012)

dchan said:


> or if you want to get real crazy..
> 
> You can build 3 of these into a glove, and wire the glove up to take measurements for you.. (I guess you could make a tab too!)
> 
> ...



Made one. It needs some calibration to make it accurate given how it works. 

Made it as a aid for training but they are not as flexible as you need/require. Also placement is a problem.

Good little project to do though.

There's a library for the wii board that works with c# (or there was a few years ago).


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

Warbow said:


> One thing I read over at http://www.archery-forum.com/showthread.php?26872-Digital-Bow-Scales is that the Easton scale can't be calibrated. Don't know if that is true, but it would be a potential problem if a judge wants to get their scale certified. If it is on the money, no problem, but if not, it, allegedly, can't be adjusted.


it can be calibrated fine. it just can't be zeroed.

if you can test them on a reference 60lb weight and determine the repeatable offset, then you have a calibration reading. obviously it's only accurate at 60lb, but all you care about for competition is whether you're over that mark. it does suck for personal draw weight testing with recurves though.

those spring scales are inaccurate in use as they can be easily distorted by mechanical binding. give the body a twist as you draw and you've just knocked off 5lb.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

caspian said:


> it can be calibrated fine. it just can't be zeroed.
> 
> if you can test them on a reference 60lb weight and determine the repeatable offset, then you have a calibration reading. obviously it's only accurate at 60lb, but all you care about for competition is whether you're over that mark.


That sounds like the Kentucky windage version of scale calibration, but I don't know the right metrology term for it... Clearly it would work as you note, but I don't know if that counts as "calibrating the scale" in the sense I normally think of it, which is adjusting the scale output to be correct. My grain scale (aka a "top loading balance"), for instance, zeros on boot or manual tare and it comes with calibration weights. The calibration mode asks for the calibration weights and then matches the 200 gram output to the 200 gram reference weight. To me that is calibrating a scale, not merely knowing the offset. (We don't call aiming off "adjusting your sight", either  ) I guess there is more than one way to use the term "calibrate". :dontknow:



caspian said:


> those spring scales are inaccurate in use as they can be easily distorted by mechanical binding. give the body a twist as you draw and you've just knocked off 5lb.


Do, that sounds like a kink in the system of letting the archer scale the bow :mg:


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

caspian said:


> those spring scales are inaccurate in use as they can be easily distorted by mechanical binding. give the body a twist as you draw and you've just knocked off 5lb.


That was the problem with the Easton scales. If you held it straight when drawing the bow, it was accurate, but a slight twist in the hand as you were drawing it would reduce the reading by as much as 5#. I learned this trick from a well-known international shooter and tried it myself, and I could with a bit of practice make the scale read what I wanted it to within a pound over a 5# range.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

Warbow said:


> I don't know if that counts as "calibrating the scale" in the sense I normally think of it, which is adjusting the scale output to be correct.


that's zeroing. nice to have, but consumer device, and expensive enough already etc. to the point where they weren't selling enough to keep them in producting.



> We don't call aiming off "adjusting your sight", either


you are, however, calibrating it.

"Calibration is a comparison between measurements – one of known magnitude or correctness made or set with one device and another measurement made in as similar way as possible with a second device." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calibration



> Do, that sounds like a kink in the system of letting the archer scale the bow :mg:


a significant one, and well known to judges. on the other hand, if the judge touches the bow and something goes wrong then it's on them, so all the judge can do is try to supervise the correct use of the scales by the archer.



Stash said:


> That was the problem with the Easton scales. If you held it straight when drawing the bow, it was accurate, but a slight twist in the hand as you were drawing it would reduce the reading by as much as 5#. I learned this trick from a well-known international shooter and tried it myself, and I could with a bit of practice make the scale read what I wanted it to within a pound over a 5# range.


mine do not do so - I've held 'em vertically, horizontally, and rotated 90° facing the floor to lift reference weights. interested to know how, as they work on a load cell strain gauge via an indirect haul which should be immune to orientation. pic here: http://www.archery-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11889&d=1413842197 it was noted though that if the rope comes off the pulley it can affect the read weight, perhaps that was the cause? http://www.archery-forum.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11890&d=1413842200

they *are* sensitive to temperature and battery voltage - typical consumer device. smart judges keep them in their pocket to minimise variation.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Stash said:


> That was the problem with the Easton scales. If you held it straight when drawing the bow, it was accurate, but a slight twist in the hand as you were drawing it would reduce the reading by as much as 5#. I learned this trick from a well-known international shooter and tried it myself, and I could with a bit of practice make the scale read what I wanted it to within a pound over a 5# range.


Same cheating system works even better with the spring scale, Just draw it at some angle from the drawing line. This was the reason why the spring scales have been abandoned in favour of the Easton one. 

So, we are now in a situation were the (60 pound) rule is enforced but there is no instrument available to check if a bow is compliant to it ....

By the way, I ever thinked that judges had to draw thr bows by themselves, beacuse was to easy to show up several pound less if drawing was made by an archer than wanted to cheat on peack weight measured...


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Berkley 50lb digital fishing scale. It's worked fine for me for a dozen years and produces readings that are consistently within .1 lb. from one draw to the next. Hang it from the ceiling and go.

http://www.berkley-fishing.com/berk...ch-management-berkley-fishingear/1285946.html


----------



## bigHUN (Feb 5, 2006)

Last weekend 720 scoring the event didn't had a scale available, the judges asked me for honesty...I told them I set my bow to a peak Dw of 57.4 lbs and holding on 23.2 lbs (these numbers from a draw board).
They let me to the line. ...and I just had a terrible score that day...


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Vittorio said:


> Same cheating system works even better with the spring scale, Just draw it at some angle from the drawing line. This was the reason why the spring scales have been abandoned in favour of the Easton one.
> 
> So, we are now in a situation were the (60 pound) rule is enforced but there is no instrument available to check if a bow is compliant to it ....
> 
> By the way, I ever thinked that judges had to draw thr bows by themselves, beacuse was to easy to show up several pound less if drawing was made by an archer than wanted to cheat on peack weight measured...


So, it seems that for the weight check to really mean anything reliable, not only do judges need a scale that's calibrated, either by adjustment to the scale itself or by a known, reliable offset written on the scale, they should also have a torque indicator on hand held scales to insure that the scale is properly in-line with the direction of force. I'd think a simple torque indicator, a thin rod or needle extending from the body of the scale would do, especially if the scale has a linkage between the scale and the hook such that any torquing would then cause a visible deflection between the needle and the position of the hook on the string (I don't know, though, under full tension if there would be enough deflection to easily discern...)


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

The check is basically a go/no go test. Why not have a bracket to hold the bows and you hang a 59 lb calibrated and certified weight on it? If the bow breaks over, you have a "fail".


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

TomB said:


> The check is basically a go/no go test. Why not have a bracket to hold the bows and you hang a 59 lb calibrated and certified weight on it? If the bow breaks over, you have a "fail".


I like the simplicity and reliability of a simple single weight test, but I do wonder if is it ok to pull 59# against the wall of lighter draw weight compound bows? Could that affect tuning? (I'm not a compounder so I have no idea.) I'm wondering if you'd have to toss on smaller weights (like with a balance) to avoid over loading lighter bows? 

And then there is who wants to be the drummer in the band? That is the judge who has to haul around the 60# calibrated weight, drawing board and stand? You wouldn't want to have to fly in with that...


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

14 2 liter bottles of water that will be consumed sometime during the day and you are there. You can usually tell on any bow less than about 50 lbs that there is no need to check it. A bowman walks up with his compound, there is no need to check his bow draw weight.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Berkley 50lb digital fishing scale. It's worked fine for me for a dozen years and produces readings that are consistently within .1 lb. from one draw to the next. Hang it from the ceiling and go.
> 
> http://www.berkley-fishing.com/berk...ch-management-berkley-fishingear/1285946.html


Good for recurve, but a 50 pound scale without automatic peak hold would be useless for judging compounds' 60 pound peak weight limit.

For easy hand held tests for recurves I bought one of these for $12:

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B00MNAG4MI/

It doesn't do peak weight, so it isn't useful for compounds or for judging compounds but it is handy for recurves. It measures settled weight after a few seconds. Importantly, the scale will beep when it has recorded settled weight so that you know when you can let down and look at the scale reading. The T shape makes it easy to hand hold and draw back, though I have to use a second person or other visual confirmation or draw check to get it back to the exact right distance.

I replaced the luggage strap with a swivel snap shackle for a secure hook and for anti-torque purposes. So far at low poundages it has been accurate to within 1 to 2 tenths of a pound, according to some reference weights I checked on calibrated scale. (Sounds fancy, but in reality at least one store clerk is probably wondering why I was weighing small weight plates on the self-service grocery checkout scale.  )


----------



## c365 (May 15, 2013)

AC power adapter $87 !?


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

c365 said:


> AC power adapter $87 !?


???

Not sure what you are referring to.


----------



## c365 (May 15, 2013)

Warbow said:


> ???
> 
> Not sure what you are referring to.


In the accessories for the $400 scale, there's what appears to be a plain ole, power adapter that come with many devices which generally sell for a few bucks, even from RadShack. Perhaps this one is something special to cost so much. Don't know, just amazed at the prices of things nowadays.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

c365 said:


> In the accessories for the $400 scale, there's what appears to be a plain ole, power adapter that come with many devices which generally sell for a few bucks, even from RadShack. Perhaps this one is something special to cost so much. Don't know, just amazed at the prices of things nowadays.


Ah, got it, the wall wort for this force gauge:

https://www.transducertechniques.com/hfg-force-gauge.aspx

Yeah, probably a $2 Chinese import they mark up over 40X.


----------



## ThomVis (Feb 21, 2012)

Bought the Kern Scale CH 50K100 because it has data hold function and the option to calibrate (zero) yourself. Really wanted the calibration option, until I saw the price of the required weights.....


----------



## LongTime (Feb 17, 2005)

One more dumb rule. Do away with weight limits.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

TomB said:


> The check is basically a go/no go test. Why not have a bracket to hold the bows and you hang a 59 lb calibrated and certified weight on it? If the bow breaks over, you have a "fail".


I would make it a 61lb weight. if it fails, there is no doubt about it.

and then some absolutist will insist on the weight being certified to some ridiculously unnecessary degree, costing serious money. they should be told to take it somewhere else.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

ThomVis said:


> Bought the Kern Scale CH 50K100 because it has data hold function and the option to calibrate (zero) yourself. Really wanted the calibration option, until I saw the price of the required weights.....


Other than the longer form factor, that looks pretty much perfect for judging. Certification available. High frequency peak weight. Settled weight. And continuous weight. And the price is actually less than that of the Easton scale. (Well, depending on what it would cost to ship to the US  )


----------



## ThomVis (Feb 21, 2012)

Warbow said:


> Other than the longer form factor, that looks pretty much perfect for judging.


It's actually a hanging scale, you're suppose to hang it from a fixed point, place hook around string and pull straight down. That way there is also no possibility to induce torque.



Vittorio said:


> By the way, I ever thinked that judges had to draw thr bows by themselves, beacuse was to easy to show up several pound less if drawing was made by an archer than wanted to cheat on peack weight measured...


And now I am imagining one of the smaller lady judges we have over here trying to draw a 59#, 32" DL compound to check if it is within limits.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

LongTime said:


> One more dumb rule. Do away with weight limits.


absolutely not. the same statement arises from time to time, generally from people who don't need to try to maintain butts that will put up with compound archers shooting skinny carbons.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

I had my two Easton scales and my spring bow scale calibrated by an ISO 17025 accredited lab. All three including the spring scale were 1 lb (spring scale) or smaller deviation from 60lb and 45lb (Para W1). The spring scale stunned me. The lab tech noted that quality spring scales are quite reliable. Who knew...


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

The damage the higher poundage bows do to a bale can be staggering.

It is not the damage to the surface of the bale, it is internal damage. I have repaired bales archers have shot 70 and 80 bows into them. It doesn't make a small hole, it blows out the internal foam winds or cut up foam, makes a hole inside. This then leads to more damage.

60 pounds is plenty.


----------



## MickeyBisco (Jul 14, 2012)

Kinda interesting 

http://pages.ebay.com/link/?nav=item.view&alt=web&id=121740086787&globalID=EBAY-US

DECUT ARCHERY BOW WEIGHT SCALE


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

Just bought one. We will see how they do


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

RickBac said:


> Just bought one. We will see how they do


Interested in how long it takes to arrive also.


----------



## MickeyBisco (Jul 14, 2012)

Serious Fun said:


> Interested in how long it takes to arrive also.


 I can't speak to their bow scale, but having ordered a few other items from them they have all arrived within a week and are much better quality than I expected for the price.


----------



## nvcnvc (Jan 27, 2009)

macnimation said:


> Apparently world Archery judges deemed them to be too inaccurate and not consistent, and are no longer allowed to be used to test competition bows, so Easton pulled them...


The easton handheld was an absolute "piece"!! Good thing they stopped using them. The same scale would measure as much as 3# variation on a 50# bow. Unacceptable.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Serious Fun said:


> I had my two Easton scales and my spring bow scale calibrated by an ISO 17025 accredited lab. All three including the spring scale were 1 lb (spring scale) or smaller deviation from 60lb and 45lb (Para W1). The spring scale stunned me. The lab tech noted that quality spring scales are quite reliable. Who knew...


What was the process and how much did it cost?


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

Serious Fun said:


> I had my two Easton scales and my spring bow scale calibrated by an ISO 17025 accredited lab. All three including the spring scale were 1 lb (spring scale) or smaller deviation from 60lb and 45lb (Para W1). The spring scale stunned me. The lab tech noted that quality spring scales are quite reliable. Who knew...


My bow scales were checked by:
http://phoenixsmalltool.com/Contact Us/contactus.html
Each device cost $35 per test and report.


----------



## gster123 (Dec 17, 2012)

bobnikon said:


> After reading your post my mind did one of those little trips it does sometimes.
> 
> That could be a really cool diagnostic tool, not likely for the average joe, but for a training center of some sort. Add a couple sensors on the grip of the bow to determine palming or heeling. And of course integrated into the archery shoes to tell left/right front/back weight distribution. Get all of that to read on a tablet, and there would be some cool data.
> 
> ...


It's not that difficult. There's a library for interfacing the wii board with C#.


----------



## bigHUN (Feb 5, 2006)

I got last year one of this for my draw board, load cell-crane scale from ebay and ended up mounting it in my club. Works really well and consistent, holds-records the peak DW also can measure the holding weight.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Guess I'm a little stunned that this thread is still going. 

It's a scale folks. Knowing the precise draw weight of our bows is one of the least of our concerns. 

But what do I know.


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

People must want them. Every time we host a tournament, Desert Sky's scales seam to find a new home.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

RickBac said:


> People must want them. Every time we host a tournament, Desert Sky's scales seam to find a new home.


. It's a compound thing


----------



## hdracer (Aug 8, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> Guess I'm a little stunned that this thread is still going.
> 
> It's a scale folks. Knowing the precise draw weight of our bows is one of the least of our concerns.
> 
> But what do I know.


Not if your shooting near the USAA/WA limit. With the variations in scales that judges use it is nice to know exactly what you're pulling. I've been told I was pulling 52# when my home scale showed 58.5#. What if the judge's scale showed 6# deviation the other way? Crank my limb bolts out at the start of a tournament? No thank you. An accurate +/- 1 lbs scale is a necessary tool for judges and tournament compound shooters alike. Not to mention setting up new arrows for your bow and creating accurate sight tapes in several of the available programs.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Why worry with a scale and the 'accuracy angst' that goes with it? Just hook a 60lb dumbbell to the bowstring and lift the bow. If the dumbbell stays on the ground until the stop is reached, 'pass'. If the dumbbell comes off the ground, 'fail'.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Larry, that's way to practical for archers. You know, we have to buy overpriced fancy tools in order to participate in our sport.


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

When you go to a Nationals or a USAT, they use a bow scale. We want Arizona archers to be ready for that. I am told that spring scales can be very accurate. I have also seen them to be very inaccurate. As Bob's mentioned, have your bow scale verified.

Also, kids grow in strength and height. Keeping them in the correct spine can be interesting. This is one more tool to help with that.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

lksseven said:


> Why worry with a scale and the 'accuracy angst' that goes with it? Just hook a 60lb dumbbell to the bowstring and lift the bow. If the dumbbell stays on the ground until the stop is reached, 'pass'. If the dumbbell comes off the ground, 'fail'.


Unless it is a calibrated weight, how do you know that "60 pound" dumbell is 60 pounds?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Keeping them in the correct spine can be interesting. This is one more tool to help with that.


And here's another:

http://www.fishusa.com/product/Berk...gn=google_ps&gclid=COOykLbV08cCFRCCaQod9NAJKw

But it's only $22.95 so it cannot possibly be useful.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Warbow said:


> Unless it is a calibrated weight, how do you know that "60 pound" dumbell is 60 pounds?


Because you verify the weight of the dumbbell beforehand, like any sensible person would. W, are you this much trouble when the nurse weighs you at the doctor's office? :tongue: 

How do you know that the target distance is EXACTLY 70meters at every venue you shoot that distance at? Do you have to verify in triplicate that the measuring tape is EXACTLY correct? And what does "exactly" mean? Is there an "acceptable margin of error" - 1/32" ... acceptable or unacceptable? Measured from the middle of the stake, or from the front of the stake? For that matter, does it depend on what "is" is? I mean, how do we know that the gravitational forces in location A are exactly the same as location B, eh? Aaaagh ... it never ends!


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> And here's another:
> 
> http://www.fishusa.com/product/Berk...gn=google_ps&gclid=COOykLbV08cCFRCCaQod9NAJKw
> 
> But it's only $22.95 so it cannot possibly be useful.


Unacceptably small amount of money. :darkbeer:


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

lksseven said:


> Because you verify the weight of the dumbbell beforehand, like any sensible person would. W, are you this much trouble when the nurse weighs you at the doctor's office? :tongue:
> 
> How do you know that the target distance is EXACTLY 70meters at every venue you shoot that distance at? Do you have to verify in triplicate that the measuring tape is EXACTLY correct? And what does "exactly" mean? Is there an "acceptable margin of error" - 1/32" ... acceptable or unacceptable? Measured from the middle of the stake, or from the front of the stake? For that matter, does it depend on what "is" is? I mean, how do we know that the gravitational forces in location A are exactly the same as location B, eh? Aaaagh ... it never ends!


Right. My point is that because the 60# rule is an exact rule that merely saying use a "60 pound dumbbell" is not sufficient. The key is still *calibration*. A 60 pound dumbbell doesn't necessarily weigh 60 pounds. You can check it on a scale, but then how do you know the scale is accurate at 60#? Calibration, again. As for the doctor's office, I've since read that scales in doctor's offices are often inaccurate, but since they aren't used for DQing a bow if it is a single pound over, then it really doesn't matter to me.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Warbow said:


> Right. My point is that because the 60# rule is an exact rule that merely saying use a "60 pound dumbbell" is not sufficient. The key is still *calibration*. A 60 pound dumbbell doesn't necessarily weigh 60 pounds. You can check it on a scale, but then how do you know the scale is accurate at 60#? Calibration, again. As for the doctor's office, I've since read that scales in doctor's offices are often inaccurate, but since they aren't used for DQing a bow if it is a single pound over, then it really doesn't matter to me.


My Goodness, how pristine must be the world you live in! :set1_draught2: 

By your criteria, there's 'no way for most of us to get there from here'. I wrestled in high school, and 130lbs was whatever the scale at that particular wrestling venue said 130lbs was. I can live with 60lb being whatever the head archery judge says it is, at that venue, at that event. And, as a 'not first time visitor to planet Earth', I'll not push my draw weight on my compound up to 59.9999lbs in training and then show up at the tournament and expect perfect symmetry between my measuring equipment and that of the tournament. Life is easier if you're a hardy wildflower who can weather inclemency, instead of a hothouse orchid always just a door opening draft away from disaster ... plan and allow for imperfection.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I'm trying to recall how many students I've ever had that shoot a 60 lb competition compound in the first place. At any given club, it can't possibly be that large a number.


----------



## TomB (Jan 28, 2003)

One of my favorite stories of all time:

The Barometer Story

by Alexander Calandra - an article from Current Science, Teacher's Edition, 1964.

Some time ago, I received a call from a colleague who asked if I would be the referee on the grading of an examination question. It seemed that he was about to give a student a zero for his answer to a physics question, while the student claimed he should receive a perfect score and would do so if the system were not set up against the student. The instructor and the student agreed to submit this to an impartial arbiter, and I was selected.

The Barometer Problem

I went to my colleague's office and read the examination question, which was, "Show how it is possible to determine the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer."

The student's answer was, "Take the barometer to the top of the building, attach a long rope to it, lower the barometer to the street, and then bring it up, measuring the length of the rope. The length of the rope is the height of the building."

Now, this is a very interesting answer, but should the student get credit for it? I pointed out that the student really had a strong case for full credit, since he had answered the question completely and correctly. On the other hand, if full credit were given, it could well contribute to a high grade for the student in his physics course. A high grade is supposed to certify that the student knows some physics, but the answer to the question did not confirm this. With this in mind, I suggested that the student have another try at answering the question. I was not surprised that my colleague agreed to this, but I was surprised that the student did.

Acting in terms of the agreement, I gave the student six minutes to answer the question, with the warning that the answer should show some knowledge of physics. At the end of five minutes, he had not written anything. I asked if he wished to give up, since I had another class to take care of, but he said no, he was not giving up. He had many answers to this problem; he was just thinking of the best one. I excused myself for interrupting him, and asked him to please go on. In the next minute, he dashed off his answer, which was:

"Take the barometer to the top of the building and lean over the edge of the roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch. Then, using the formula S= 1/2 at^2, calculate the height of the building."

At this point, I asked my colleague if he would give up. He conceded and I gave the student almost full credit. In leaving my colleague's office, I recalled that the student had said he had other answers to the problem, so I asked him what they were.

"Oh, yes," said the student. "There are many ways of getting the height of a tall building with the aid of a barometer. For example, you could take the barometer out on a sunny day and measure the height of the barometer, the length of its shadow, and the length of the shadow of the building, and by the use of simple proportion, determine the height of the building."

"Fine," I said. "And the others?"

"Yes," said the student. "There is a very basic measurement method that you will like. In this method, you take the barometer and begin to walk up the stairs. As you climb the stairs, you mark off the length of the barometer along the wall. You then count the number of marks, and this will give you the height of the building in barometer units. A very direct method.

"Of course, if you want a more sophisticated method, you can tie the barometer to the end of a string, swing it as a pendulum, and determine the value of 'g' at the street level and at the top of the building. From the difference between the two values of 'g', the height of the building can, in principle, be calculated."

Finally, he concluded, "If you don't limit me to physics solutions to this problem, there are many other answers, such as taking the barometer to the basement and knocking on the superintendent's door. When the superintendent answers, you speak to him as follows: 'Dear Mr. Superintendent, here I have a very fine barometer. If you will tell me the height of this building, I will give you this barometer.'"

At this point, I asked the student if he really didn't know the answer to the problem. He admitted that he did, but that he was so fed up with college instructors trying to teach him how to think and to use critical thinking, instead of showing him the structure of the subject matter, that he decided to take off on what he regarded mostly as a sham.


So, just ask the compound archer what is the draw weight of his bow.


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

limbwalker said:


> I'm trying to recall how many students I've ever had that shoot a 60 lb competition compound in the first place. At any given club, it can't possibly be that large a number.


Actually, there are a couple of clubs that I know of (that I won't mention in public) that would LOVE to shoot their bows at 60 plus pounds. I know one club that has some of their 13 year olds shooting 65 pounds for NFAA and 3D.

So in the Phoenix area, there are a decent amount that does shoot that high of a poundage and end up turning it down for FITA events.


----------



## Beastmaster (Jan 20, 2009)

TomB said:


> One of my favorite stories of all time:
> 
> The Barometer Story
> (snip)


I'm going to borrow this.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

TomB said:


> One of my favorite stories of all time:
> 
> The Barometer Story
> 
> ...


I like the story. Snopes classifies it as a Legend, one that started before the publication of a version by Alexander Calandra.

http://www.snopes.com/college/exam/barometer.asp

What it really shows, I'd say, is poor exam question design. (With the question deliberately written by the story teller to justify the alternate answers the student gives in the story.) 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barometer_question



TomB said:


> So, just ask the compound archer what is the draw weight of his bow.


Given what we've learned in this thread about the reliability of even the expensive Easton scale in this thread, there is a strong possibility the archer likely doesn't have an accurate answer even if they think they do, certainly not +/- one pound. That wouldn't matter much for bows that aren't close to the limit, of course, but what I am saying is that your attempt to cut the Gordian knot relies on the unproven presumption that the archer has an accurate measuring device.


----------



## hdracer (Aug 8, 2007)

limbwalker said:


> I'm trying to recall how many students I've ever had that shoot a 60 lb competition compound in the first place. At any given club, it can't possibly be that large a number.


We have 6 or 7 out of a club of 40-ish. Granted most are adults but 1 or 2 teenagers are shooting them. The rest are below 50#. But each of us get checked at every tournament. Since compounds are most efficient at or near their peak weight why is it surprising that we try to get close to 60#? Given the fact that some of these judge's scales can be off by 4+ lbs when compared to our home scales there should be some certification or standard for the scales judges are using.


----------



## RickBac (Sep 18, 2011)

Love the Barometer Story, legend or not.

A scale used at a tournament to check compound bow poundage should be certified every once in a while.

Several times I have had archers pull their bow back and the scale say 62 or 63 pounds. I tell them they need to turn their bow down to meet the 60 pound limit. Of course they argue saying I need to check MY scale because there bow is set to 60 pounds per their scale at home. Their scale is right, mine is wrong. 

I find this kind of funny. First, regardless of when a scale is certified, the one used at the tournament is the correct one. Second, there have been others in line that say our scale is exactly correct (not that it proves anything). Third, they assume they are disqualified (even though they have not shot anything for a score yet and equipment check is a courtesy to ensure your bow is inside the rules). Fourth, they have said theirs is correct because they check it all the time (on their own not certified).

These are usually 3d archers coming over to shoot target. We do our best to educate them on the rules of target archery. 

So, the bow scale at a tournament is not for the regular target archer as they know the rules, but for the archer that doesn't know the target rules or chooses to push the rules.


----------



## opa (Jul 19, 2003)

This is "similar" to the easton scale. Don't know how accurate it is though.

http://www.amazon.com/Weigh-LS-300-Portable-Digital-Luggage/dp/B001UR5XCW

It does peakweight too, see the manual:

https://www.google.nl/url?sa=t&rct=...al.pdf&usg=AFQjCNH_ufItkA_QSQPz0yv5jlj9BpO7jg

Opa


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

opa said:


> This is "similar" to the easton scale. Don't know how accurate it is though.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Weigh-LS-300-Portable-Digital-Luggage/dp/B001UR5XCW
> 
> ...


Technically, any scale measures peak weight, the question is whether it holds it. Some do after you hold the weight for a few seconds, but I found holding still at full draw for a number of seconds was impossible while waiting for the "beep".

The link has promise in that it holds the highest measured weight, however speed is a factor: "Scale will display highest pull force measured...if reached within three seconds from start of pull". That might not be enough time. In fact one review says to pull slowly. 

Clearly the only answer is for you to buy one and test it out. For the team!


----------



## FlyingFishes (May 21, 2015)

The final solution is to go to the owner of the building and say, "Dear Mr. Owner, please tell me how tall your building is. If you do not, I will hit you with my barometer."


----------



## erose (Aug 12, 2014)

Has anyone seen this one: https://www.aimarchery.biz/decut-digital-electronic-bow-scale/ ?

It looks promising, ie it is made for archery at least.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

The Feather river bow scale costs 30 bucks. http://www.lancasterarchery.com/feather-river-bow-scale.html I contacted Feather river to find out about the lifetime warranty. http://www.featherriversports.com/bowscale_090.htm Without hesitation Feather River offered to check a scale and put a new label if needed at no charge. Perhaps judges can have their spring scales checked periodically as standard practice. No batteries and within 1 lb plus or minus accuracy sounds reasonable to me.


----------



## x1440 (Jan 5, 2003)

TexARC used to sell a nice little handheld digital bow scale on his website a few years ago. It's accurate and easy to use. I don't remember why he stopped selling them.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

Serious Fun said:


> No batteries and within 1 lb plus or minus accuracy sounds reasonable to me.


the problem is not the accuracy of the spring, it's that twisting the scale body during the draw affects the reading.


----------



## Serious Fun (May 12, 2003)

caspian said:


> the problem is not the accuracy of the spring, it's that twisting the scale body during the draw affects the reading.


I thought the same thing, however when I spoke to the testing company, they indicated that quality spring scales are quite accurate. 
My personal over decade old bow spring scale tested to within one pound of accuracy ranging from 20 to 85 pounds.


----------

