# GRAY R1.1 Final Release and pictures



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

*Tiller and allingment*

And For those who would like to see how the limb alignment works, here is a snippet from the manual.





















Regards
Gray Archery


----------



## Mad Wally (Apr 26, 2013)

Hi,
I love the look of your design and obviously you have put a lot of thought into it, however on the bows I own it is the limb bolt that bears the inward force of the limbs. Won't the limb bolt be pushed fully to the left (on last picture)?


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Mad Wally said:


> Hi,
> I love the look of your design and obviously you have put a lot of thought into it, however on the bows I own it is the limb bolt that bears the inward force of the limbs. Won't the limb bolt be pushed fully to the left (on last picture)?


The limb bolt in this case do not take the downward force of the limb. The machined section of the riser holds the dovetail section in place and prevents the limb from downward movement. The limb bolt is designed to only move left and right and self align to limb surface. The limb bolt takes only upward loading.


----------



## Mad Wally (Apr 26, 2013)

GML said:


> The limb bolt in this case do not take the downward force of the limb. The machined section of the riser holds the dovetail section in place and prevents the limb from downward movement. The limb bolt is designed to only move left and right and self align to limb surface. The limb bolt takes only upward loading.


That is more or less the answer I expected, however is this "permitted" from an ILF-standard point of view and are there other riser manufactures that also use the insert in the limbs to bear the force?


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Hi Wally, that is the reason for the stainless steel dove tail insert, it is designed to take an estimated 600N, or about 60 kg for a 44 pound bow . If you put that on a bolt at length it would most likely bend the bolt. Do yourself a favor and put in some tape on you bow where your dovetail goes in and it will probably show pressure marks when a limb is inserted and strung. If you take the TD4 limb pocket, you will clearly see that the limb bolt/ tiller adjustment takes no shear force. I have been shooting this limb allingment system for over 3 years with no limb breakage or damage of any kind. I personally practice maybe 1-2 times a week but still manage 568 indoors and 620 outdoors at the 720. The system has proven itself in terms of reliability.


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Also some of you wanted to see what the bow would look like when strung up. Here is an example with GRAY stabilizers.






.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

I would like to add that anyone with concerns about the limb bolts taking the downward/upward forces of the limb roots should direct that concern to all the other manufacturers, and yes, pro-series bolts too. That concern is not actually the linear compression along the axis of the limb, but rather a torque force resulting from the often non centralized location of the limbroot/bolt head position, and in the pro-series bolt, the fact that the limb bolt axis is mostly not at perpendicular with the swiveling bolt head.


----------



## Mad Wally (Apr 26, 2013)

Mad Wally said:


> Hi,
> I love the look of your design and obviously you have put a lot of thought into it, however on the bows I own it is the limb bolt that bears the inward force of the limbs. Won't the limb bolt be pushed fully to the left (on last picture)?





GML said:


> The limb bolt in this case do not take the downward force of the limb. The machined section of the riser holds the dovetail section in place and prevents the limb from downward movement. The limb bolt is designed to only move left and right and self align to limb surface. The limb bolt takes only upward loading.


I must correct myself: on my hoyt excel with Uukha limbs the tiller bolt takes the force, but on my GMX with inno ex powers the force is on the dowels.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

A brilliant design.

That is the limb bolt assembly and alignment system I've had in my head for about 3 years now. Glad to see someone finally put it into production. If I were you, I'd patent that asap.

John


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Mad Wally said:


> I must correct myself: on my hoyt excel with Uukha limbs the tiller bolt takes the force, but on my GMX with inno ex powers the force is on the dowels.


Hi Mad Wally, when designing the riser I did pick up that the distance on the limb from where the dove tail is to the limbolt grove is very different from manufacturer to manufacturer. For example that distance is 3mm longer on a Win & Win limb than on a Hoyt. With limb slightly longer it will rest against the limb bolt. I have designed the riser to take both makes. 

Thanks minoritydude for clearing that up for the guys. Very well technically explained.


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> A brilliant design.
> 
> That is the limb bolt assembly and alignment system I've had in my head for about 3 years now. Glad to see someone finally put it into production. If I were you, I'd patent that asap.
> 
> John


Hi John, unfortunately I cannot patent it right now as it is now common knowledge..... Damn social media &#55357;&#56877;. But thanks for the comments though, it is such a pleasure to setup and tune the bow. And the spanner flats really do help with setting the tiller. The problem is that the system is a heavy one and expensive to manufacture but it is worth while if you are a tinkerer with your bow tune like myself.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Common knowledge? I don't get that. You're the first to actually PRODUCE it. I'm sure that counts for something.


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Hello All
Brace height please. Thanks [ Later


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Common knowledge? I don't get that. You're the first to actually PRODUCE it. I'm sure that counts for something.


Funny thing about patents that a lot of them have never been made. You put pen to paper, claim it's yours and there you go, you have a patent. But common knowledge refers to the fact that other persons of the public ,besides the inventor, now know how to design it. But to me it would be standard engineering practice.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> But to me it would be standard engineering practice.


One would think it should be by now, right? Like I said, when the idea of how to design a moveable limb bolt that adjust not only for lateral alignment, but tilts for flush mounting of the limb fork, came to me - this was the only real solution I could come up with. Glad to see it in production. At least for me, it's a proof of concept.

John


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Unk Bond said:


> Hello All
> Brace height please. Thanks [ Later


As Requested


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> One would think it should be by now, right? Like I said, when the idea of how to design a moveable limb bolt that adjust not only for lateral alignment, but tilts for flush mounting of the limb fork, came to me - this was the only real solution I could come up with. Glad to see it in production. At least for me, it's a proof of concept.
> 
> John


Hi John, you know the human mind is a pretty funny thing. They need to see it to believe it first which can be a problem when a good concept comes along. Well what can I say, great minds think alike, for me the limb bolt tilt is crucial as well as I have heard to many limb bolt heads snapping off because of the way the limb sits against the limb bolt head. 

Graeme


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> the limb bolt tilt is crucial


Yes, I've always thought this was a better solution than the "floating" limb bolt head. With Hoyt already using a dowel alignment system, I'm pretty surprised they didn't come up with this years ago.


----------



## Plucker (May 24, 2014)

Sorry but the patentability have already been ruined by posting about it here... However there seems to be little point in actually patenting this from a strategic perspective anyway, for that to be worthwhile he would need a US, EU and likely a Chinese and Korean patent as well. The cost of such would be a significant investment of about 1 million USD the first year and then about 100.000 USD every year from then on.

Just not worth it in my opinion considering even the best case scenario for how many raisers he is going to sell. With those kinds of added costs he would have to increase price to the point where it would be ridiculously expensive to buy for the consumer.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

Didn't we have a big thread here a few years ago about how patenting a design is useless and just throwing away a significant sum of money?


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Plucker said:


> Sorry but the patentability have already been ruined by posting about it here... However there seems to be little point in actually patenting this from a strategic perspective anyway, for that to be worthwhile he would need a US, EU and likely a Chinese and Korean patent as well. The cost of such would be a significant investment of about 1 million USD the first year and then about 100.000 USD every year from then on.
> 
> Just not worth it in my opinion considering even the best case scenario for how many raisers he is going to sell. With those kinds of added costs he would have to increase price to the point where it would be ridiculously expensive to buy for the consumer.


Hey Plucker, I completely agree, patents are a struggle and are for the land of large corporations and large financial backers. 

Regards 
Graeme


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Pls note following limbs system by Fiberbow, used in production on their FB8.2 21" Fiberwood riser since more than 2 years:









Not only the bolts tilt, but the entire pocket structure, too ...

Anyhow, designer admits his idea came from some old compound designs that were already featuring tilting bolts. And, yes, the alignement system is same as on the G1 risers (parts are interchangeable).


----------



## GBUSA (Jun 6, 2013)

I like the looks of the riser. I like the technology and thought that has gone into it. 
I hope it sells well and the owner/builder is well compensated.

Now all that's left is to put it into the hands of someone we here all know and trust to shoot and review the thing 👍
This has worked well for the new WF-25 riser that is also a small, local production riser for the BB audience.

Best of luck with the GRAY R1.1 riser.

Regards,
GB


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Vittorio said:


> Pls note following limbs system by Fiberbow, used in production on their FB8.2 21" Fiberwood riser since more than 2 years:
> 
> View attachment 2121592
> 
> ...


My 15 y/o Martin Scepter has tilting limb bolts. It is easy to see how adding threaded ends to the "pin" would allow for lateral movement as well. This is not a new idea. However, the challenge to such a system has been how to lock it down. Most solutions require a compromise of some sort. The Gray R1.1, for instance, uses a grub screw with nylon insert to press against the threads of the limb bolt instead of the standard lock-nut. The nylon presumably will protect the limb bolt threads and hold the limb bolt in place. This may work just fine. Time will tell. 

Send me one, GML, and I will gladly test that for you


----------



## PaulME (Jun 11, 2014)

Patents give the illusion you can make money. If you don't have the money to go after infringers your out of luck.

In the US you still have a year to file after public disclosure. However in the EU (not sure about the Asian countries and I'm not going to look it up at the moment) public disclosure kills the ability to file so no go there. US fees are no where near the the prohibitive numbers listed previously. In fact there are separate fee schedules for small and micro businesses. You can do the work yourself but if you involve patent attorneys it's going to cost you. Usually can take a couple years for the back and forth before the patent gets granted (assuming it gets granted), then there are maintenance fees but they are not onerous in the US especially if you are a small business.

Possibly better to get a design patent rather than a utility patent. This only protects the exact look of your design. Cheap to get and give some protection but also easy to get around.

Digression - if people say they have a "provisional patent" it does not mean anything. Just put there place in line that gives them a year to file real paperwork. Actual real application would then need to be reviewed ....

Paul


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Good morning all.

Mr Vitorio, after researching some patents myself before the release of the design, it did have some similarities to a compound system but without the side nuts. I remember a prototype you developed to determine angles on the bow, is this a similar system?

The system on the fibre bow is elegant but I think it's pretty complicated. It's the first time I have seen it and it looks beautiful.

Thanks GBUSA for all the compliments. I will try my utmost this year to get it to the public as I think it's a nice and unique product, although it is possibly aiming for a small market I still believe it has something special to offer. I am currently working on the review thing so give me some time to sort that one out  we have not got many Olympic recurve archers in South Africa. 

Seattlepop, the nylon insert is a standard practice that is used in engineering. Using it prevents the bolt from turning by hand as well as with tools. I have used the system for over 5 years and no issues. 

And everyone happy new year, hopefully it's going to be a fantastic year. 

Regards Graeme


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

PaulME said:


> Patents give the illusion you can make money. If you don't have the money to go after infringers your out of luck.
> 
> In the US you still have a year to file after public disclosure. However in the EU (not sure about the Asian countries and I'm not going to look it up at the moment) public disclosure kills the ability to file so no go there. US fees are no where near the the prohibitive numbers listed previously. In fact there are separate fee schedules for small and micro businesses. You can do the work yourself but if you involve patent attorneys it's going to cost you. Usually can take a couple years for the back and forth before the patent gets granted (assuming it gets granted), then there are maintenance fees but they are not onerous in the US especially if you are a small business.
> 
> ...


Hey Paul 

Thanks for the advice, will have a look at it but fees are fees.very nice right up on patent law in the us.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

GML said:


> ......The system on the fibre bow is elegant but I think it's pretty complicated. It's the first time I have seen it and it looks beautiful.
> ........


The Fiberbow FB8.2 floating limbs pockets system could be probably patented, but as mentioned, to patent these things for a small company means only to spend huge money for no protection at all. 
This floating limbs pockets allow to keep the angle between the bolt and the limb constant, while the entire pocket moving gives a very wide excursion to the loading of the limbs, almost impossible to get in a different way, even if this is changing the final geomtry of the riser during limbs adjustment. I have to credit Paolo Sabbioni, owner of Fiberbow and designer of all Fiberbow products, for the very original solution. Bernardini went to a similar way in the early 90's with the Mito riser, but that solution was very expensive to make and geomtry was changing too much adjusting pockets angles. 

Your solution for the Gray R1.1 anyhow is also elegant, a good compromise between all those possible for the ILF risers.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> a good compromise between all those possible for the ILF risers.


That's how I view it. The original purpose of the dovetail vs. a dowel was to allow for limb angle adjustments, to a limited degree. If the entire limb pocket angle adjusts, there is no reason for a dovetail.

This design is, as you say, the very best compromise. It's so simple and fairly obvious to me, that I'm very surprised nobody has used it yet.


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Thanks Vittorio and Limbwalker for the constructive post.

Also some exiting news to all those who interested. The Gray R1.1 will be comming out with a 27 inch version soon. Intial FEA work looks good.

Regards
Graeme


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Have some more pics with a full GRAY setup. Owner is very happy with the bow.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

Looks like a nice bow, good luck with it. The Stolid Bull Vanquish also has this adjustable pivoting limb bolt system, a couple of years now from prototpe, I've had my production Number V010 riser just over a year.


----------



## Stolid Bull (Oct 4, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> A brilliant design.
> 
> That is the limb bolt assembly and alignment system I've had in my head for about 3 years now. Glad to see someone finally put it into production. If I were you, I'd patent that asap.
> 
> John


Hi John,
You could have seen this system working in the Stolid Bull Vanquish.
Very reliable.
Holger


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Perhaps, but I was talking to Jim Belcher at SKY about producing this long before the Stolid Bull riser came out. Actually, I don't recall ever seeing that feature on that riser, but it's a good design. Curious to see the dowel itself to see if it incorporates the idea I have.


----------



## Stolid Bull (Oct 4, 2012)

I did not want to claim that we invented the wheel anew.
I think, it is not so easy to develop something really new in the field of building archery equipment because thousands of intelligent people have tried to improve their equipment in the past.
If you browse through the patent files, especially in the US, you can find nearly everything imaginable. Most of those patents have never been brought into reality for whichever reason but there are great ideas amongst them.


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Agreed, I have gone through many of the archery history posts and man there where some brilliant designers before us but they where far ahead of there time.


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

GML said:


> Funny thing about patents that a lot of them have never been made. You put pen to paper, claim it's yours and there you go, you have a patent. But common knowledge refers to the fact that other persons of the public ,besides the inventor, now know how to design it. But to me it would be standard engineering practice.


Hello
Next time mail it to your self registered.
And leave it sealed till needed.
Then spew about it all you want afterwards. [Later


----------



## Stolid Bull (Oct 4, 2012)

Here in Germany it is quite expensive to file patent. At least 3.000 Euros. And that patent then is only valid for Germany.


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Hello
I have two wheel bow riser by Dave Barnsdale.
I have had them for quiet some time now. That has this feature. [ Later


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

Hello
I have two wheel bow risers by Dave Barnsdale.
I have had for quiet some time now. That has this feature.

Protecting a patent has a price tag also [ Later


----------



## Unk Bond (Aug 1, 2004)

:embara: sorry guys for the doubled.[ Later


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

And here it is, the 27 inch GRAY R1.1. Comes in at 1350g. Will start machining hopefully next week.


----------



## Plucker (May 24, 2014)

PaulME said:


> Patents give the illusion you can make money. If you don't have the money to go after infringers your out of luck.
> 
> In the US you still have a year to file after public disclosure. However in the EU (not sure about the Asian countries and I'm not going to look it up at the moment) public disclosure kills the ability to file so no go there. US fees are no where near the the prohibitive numbers listed previously. In fact there are separate fee schedules for small and micro businesses. You can do the work yourself but if you involve patent attorneys it's going to cost you. Usually can take a couple years for the back and forth before the patent gets granted (assuming it gets granted), then there are maintenance fees but they are not onerous in the US especially if you are a small business.
> 
> ...


Hi Paul, the numbers posted assumes that the applicant uses a patent attorney of some repute. And would cover all of the markets covered in my previous post, they are estimates but in my experience fairly accurate.

BR Plucker


----------



## PaulME (Jun 11, 2014)

Not all that up on EU patents but a quick look over at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/indprop/patent/faqs/index_en.htm#maincontentSec9 finds this;



> 1. How much will it cost to obtain a 'unitary patent' and how much does a similar protection cost today?
> After the transitional period (in which certain additional translations will be required), the cost to obtain a European Patent with unitary effect will be around 5 000 euro. This covers the procedural fees of the EPO as well as the cost of the translation of the claims to the two other procedural languages of the EPO.
> During the transitional period of maximum 12 years, the cost will be slightly higher, about 6 500 euro. This includes the cost of the additional translation required during the transitional period: in order to facilitate the access to patent information until high-quality machine translations become available, European patents with unitary effect that were granted in French or German will need to be translated to English and the ones granted in English will need to be translated to another official language of the EU.
> Obtaining patent protection in the territory of the 27 Member States by means of a European patent costs today about 36 000 euro (the majority of which goes on translation and other costs linked to validation, such as fees of local patent offices and costs for local patent agents).
> By comparison, in the US, a patent costs about 2 000 euros, in China about 600 euros.


Looking about a bit it looks like this is in the ratification process so no idea when lower cost "unity" patent will go into effect.

I'm not going to spend a lot of time looking this stuff up but assuming you add attorney fees on top of the listed costs - yea, you are likely to get to $100K easily especially if filling the old way - patent in each country.

Really only a couple points I was keying on - 

US patents can be "relatively" cheap for an individual to get.
At least in the US an individual can do most of the work themselves. My assumption is anyone looking for patent advise on a forum like this does not have 6 figure $ to throw at patents and attorneys - maybe wrong but seems reasonable to me. 
The disclosure in this forum kills the ability to go for a EU patent - its disclosed, cant get a patent on it anymore, the end.
Patents will only protect you if you have the $$ to litigate them, and if a business with deep pockets wants to go to court even the $100K amount will look small - and your patent may get invalidated under the challenge.
Most importantly - Patents are NOT a licence to print money. Most times it is relatively easy to design around a patent. It onloy protects you if you are willing to spend the $$ to go after infringers. Generally much better to just get on with producing the product and selling it as the original poster is doing. 


Loads - probably most patents cover ideas that never get produced commercially. It is fun to look at some of the stuff that has been granted patents, always got a kick out of this one;
Greenhouse helmet - honest to god patent granted in 1986
http://www.google.com/patents/US4605000

fun to also follow some of the references...

Paul

Nice looking product GML - hope you sell a lot of them.


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Thanks Paul for the compliments. I have had training on patent law myself and it boils down to what you said, first you need money to apply internationally, ( then a guy in china copies it and the patent is the useless) and you need money to protect it as well, it's a hard ballance for a small company to do. Thanks Paul for a thorough education on patents for the other users out there.


----------



## Jonnolane (Jan 11, 2015)

The 27" riser looks fantastic! Kudos to you for the design as well- looks very simple, solid, and functional. I'm 6'2" tall, with a 32" draw length, and am starting to get sick of overbowing my limbs on my 25" SF Forged plus riser, so I'm definitely in the market for a new one @ 27"

Do you ship to Australia, and what would I be looking at $$wise for one of these in Matt black, wood grip?


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Hey Jonolane will get back to you on the shipping. I will PM you with further details.


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Hi again Jonolane, the bow will come with a wooden grip.


----------



## Jonnolane (Jan 11, 2015)

Thanks Graeme, appreciate the info; damn fine fine looking riser! Really good to see some innovation, and a smaller player able to provide a quality product without the marketing hype we see so often


----------



## GML (Nov 17, 2008)

Jonnolane said:


> Thanks Graeme, appreciate the info; damn fine fine looking riser! Really good to see some innovation, and a smaller player able to provide a quality product without the marketing hype we see so often


Thanks Jonnolane, Thanks I did spend about three years developing it as I went along. I have to thank social media for this as it evens out the playing field somewhat hey. 

So for further clarification on the pricing, the 25" GRAY R1.1 will be going for $605 and the 27" for $650 incl tax excluding shipping.

For any further questions please don't hesitate to ask.
Regards
Graeme


----------



## Jonnolane (Jan 11, 2015)

Hey Graeme, any updates on the riser? Looking forward to hearing more about the 27" model...


----------

