# Easton Carbon One Question? Thanks!



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

Best i can tell a 500 spine with 90 grain points. Someone mentioned there is a computer program you can plug your numbers into and it will give you a very precise spine, could someone post a link for that if possible please. 
Thanks
Jim
:aero:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I'd probably lean more toward a 550 spine with heavier points. 



> If i can't break 1200 with these babies i can blame Limbwalker


No, always blame your equipment! ha, ha

John


----------



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

Limbwalker,
550 it is! with the heavy points. 

Thanks so much for your invaluable input, i really enjoy reading your insights, i specially would commend you on all the tireless work and time you put in with your JOAD team, they are really lucky to have such a great coach!!

Best Regards,
Jim
:aero:


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

John, you sure about that? 31" arrow at 45#? I'd be suggesting .500/100 or a slightly long .450/120


----------



## rossing6 (Jun 7, 2008)

One of my students uses the Carbon Ones and they perform just great, identical to his ACG's...he has a shorter draw that you so is using arrows more in the .800 spine range, but they are very durable and tunable. I would say if you want a little more forgiving to plan on running slightly heavier tip weights so if you find they are too weak you can lighten the tips back to normal and be o.k. 

For spine I would think somewhere in the .500.550 range, but I don't coach anybody with draws that long, so I'll leave that to those that have personal experience with that. If you are not sure, you can usually buy those arrows individually and tune a couple and see how they do and go from there...that's my best method when I don't have the proper arrows to play with. Cheers, Ryan


----------



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

Thanks for all the advice!
Jim:aero:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Stash said:


> John, you sure about that? 31" arrow at 45#? I'd be suggesting .500/100 or a slightly long .450/120


Yea, I'm pretty sure. Parallel all carbon shafts tune about .080" stiffer than an ACE or X10. I shoot 32.5" arrows at 47# and use 450 spine parallel all-carbon shafts (Nano Pro's), and I've gotten away with 500's at 45#, so I think the 550's will be best.

John


----------



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

Arrows arrive tomorrow!:smile:

Carbon one 550's

Thanks Limbwalker and everyone for your input!

Jim
:aero:


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Jim, you're welcome. Just remember, you can always cut more off, but you don't get to add it back. So be careful, go slow and leave plenty of arrow at first.

John


----------



## TheOldNewbie (Mar 31, 2012)

limbwalker said:


> Yea, I'm pretty sure. Parallel all carbon shafts tune about .080" stiffer than an ACE or X10. I shoot 32.5" arrows at 47# and use 450 spine parallel all-carbon shafts (Nano Pro's), and I've gotten away with 500's at 45#, so I think the 550's will be best.
> 
> John


What are the differences between parallel, wrapped like Ultra Fast and pultruded all carbon shafts? Especially the difference between parallel and pultruded. Which are the strongest for youth and beginners? I would assume that wrapped are the strongest and pultruded the most prone to damage.

Edit: I found this SEM photo of a Carbon One 900.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/07/Easton_Carbon_One_900.png


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

That's one seriously impressive photo.











I think you're confusing/mixing up two different properties of arrows, namely method of manufacture and profile.

Arrow shafts can be described as parallel, tapered or barrelled.

_Parallel_ is as you'd expect, the same diameter from front to back, the traditional arrow.

_Barrelled_ means the middle is thicker, more carbon on the same aluminium tune for aluminium/carbon arrows. 
The spine rating is mainly coming from the middle section so the extra thickness there gives a heavier spine while the lesser thickness fore and aft gives a lighter arrow for that spine.

_Tapered_ means the arrow diameter is smaller at the front than the back. More aerodynamic. 

Pultruded and wrapped are relating to how the carbon fibres are placed in the shaft. Above my head, someone else may explain that.


----------



## TheOldNewbie (Mar 31, 2012)

My question was related to arrow construction and not shape. I believe that parallel is a type of construction, along with wrapped and pultruded, but perhaps I'm wrong about that. If I look at my CI Super Club arrows, it appears that the fibers run in a crisscross pattern. It is obvious from the above photo that with parallel construction the carbon fibers all run lengthwise, although it appears that the white layer runs at an angle. It is my impression that pultruded arrows are constructed or small fibers that would mostly run lengthwise, but I'm not sure of that. I don't think that Carbon One and Nano Pro are classified as pultruded, but again I'm not sure of that.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

TON, I can't speak to manufacturing methods. If you google the Easton target catalogue (2011 is the version I checked), they show the difference between parallel/tapered/barrelled in the ACE/X10 area. Down in the Carbon One area they give you a diagram that shows the composition of the C1.

Pultruded is the older method of manufacturer and lead to damaged arrows splitting longitudinally. If guessing the dangers of that is why they changed methods. Cheap carbon arrows may still be pultruded.


----------



## normlefebvre (Aug 21, 2010)

*There is a discrepancy between the Easton online chart and their selection software.

I shoot a Hoyt Gold Medalist 68inch, 47lbs on fingers with 29 1/4 inch draw.
-My Carbon One 500 are a bit stiff even with the 120grn points. 550 would be better for me.

The reason I chose the 500 was because the Easton software recommended that spine with the data entered as opposed to the online chart which recommend the 550.

I contacted Easton to alert them of that discrepancy but never received an acknowledgment.

I would suggest the same as limbwalker, thast is 550 spine


----------



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

normlefebvre,
That is identical to my set up or very close! Thanks for posting!

Very interesting discussion and pictures of the carbon arrow construction too!!


Jim
:aero:


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Jim, what's your arrow length? In your first post you said 31", norm's is about 2" shorter, so at a similar bow weight you'd be possibly 2 sizes stiffer, that is, 450.

I'm not going to second-quess limbwalker's recommendation, but it should be pointed out that a 450 Nano Pro is not really comparable to a 450 Carbon One - the Nano Pro uses a stiffer, lighter carbon with higher vibration frequency so a weaker static spine than other shafts is recommended.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Stash, do you think there is that much difference between one parallel all carbon arrow and the next? I'm not sure, which is why I ask. I wish I had more experience with the Carbon One's so I could be more help there.

John


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Stash said:


> Jim, what's your arrow length?
> 
> ... it should be pointed out that a 450 Nano Pro is not really comparable to a 450 Carbon One - the Nano Pro uses a stiffer, lighter carbon with higher vibration frequency so a weaker static spine than other shafts is recommended.


Now we're getting complicated..... not only do we have to consider static spine but how quickly it goes from one bend into the next..........

John, my previous arrows were Jazz before I got C1's after much deliberation. They were new out at the time, Redlines were the much-loved and recommended standard.

They've been highly commended by compounders and in my limited way I've never been disappointed with them.............if only they could get them to find their own way home...............


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Actually, yes there is, as far as I know.

The higher end, high modulus shafts are lighter, with a faster vibration frequency. That means the "paradox" (I know...) happens faster, so you need a weaker spine arrow than you would with a heavier, lower modulus carbon shaft. 

The static spine is stiffer, but the actual vibration frequency ends up similar. If you look at OT2. for example, when you're using Nano Pro and Nano XR, it suggests a weaker spine than C1, Medallion, VAP or standard grade all-carbon shafts. Larry with Pinwheel tells me he made an adjustment in his software on the Nano Pro and Nano XRs based on recommendations from a top CX shooter.

I use C1s myself, but with a compound, so that's not really relevant. But I previously shot Nano XRs at 490, but now use C1s at 450. Both shoot about the same except for the extra weight of the C1s.

Several local recurve archers here use the C1s and they tend to use exactly what the Easton chart recommends. In the case of the OP, at 45/31, Easton suggests .500 on the weak side, .450 on the stiff side, hence my original suggestion above.

But I don't shoot recurve any more, so I'm not 100% on that.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Further - John, if you put in 47/32 for your own arrows, Easton's selection chart would suggest 410 C1s. 
Carbon Express selection chart would "adjust" your weight to 43 and 43/32 gives 450 Nano Pros, which is what you have.

45/31 with CX Nano Pros on their chart shows 500 (or 550).

As always, it's just a starting point, though.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Another confounding issue is the speed of the limbs for the poundage, then the torsional stability, human inputs....... it's no wonder that charts can only ever be considered as 'starting points' or guidelines.

Not as much a problem with buying C1's as it is with buying ACE's, X10's or McK2's.

Unfortunately, trying out different spines before you buy isn't always on option, though ordering half a dozen individual shafts can lessen the monetary risk....when it can be done.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Great info there Stash. Yes, 450's are what I use, and yes, 410 X10's and 400 ACE's were my previous size choices. 

One thing I did notice when Michele shot in London, was how quickly his Nano Pro's settled in on the high speed camera. It was noticeably different than the x10's. 

John


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Maybe Vittorio can give Michele's specs and see how they relate to what CX chart suggests for him now what the Easton charts suggest for what he was using?


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

Stash said:


> Actually, yes there is, as far as I know.
> 
> The higher end, high modulus shafts are lighter, with a faster vibration frequency. That means the "paradox" (I know...) happens faster, so you need a weaker spine arrow than you would with a heavier, lower modulus carbon shaft.
> 
> ...


Here's a data point. I recently upgraded my daughter's arrows from Carbon One 900 to Nano Pro 900. Same static spine, with the same weight of 5.3 grains per inch. Same point weight of 110 grains. The Nano Pro's were pretty much instantly in tune on her 24 pound Formula Excel bow, 24 pound limbs wound in all the way with 30 inch arrows and 29 inch draw.

The same amount of carbon is used in both arrows, but the much thinner diameter means a thicker wall thickness on the Nanos. The smaller diameter of the Nano Pro requires a higher grade of material for the same spine as the Carbon One.

Downside of the Nano Pro relative to the Carbon One is that the Carbon Ones can take hot-melted points for easy rework, but the Nano Pro components fit with tighter tolerances and have to be glued in. This means that her next step up in draw weight will require that I cut odd the tail of the arrow, nock pins and all to stiffen.

Upside of the nano pro is much better tolerance, greater durability because the smaller diameter offers more crush resistance, and very good aerodynamics. (She can easily reach 60 meters with 24 pound low end glass limbs right now.)

For myself I'll try the McKinney II arrow as an upgrade from Carbon One, but I expect that the spine will be a bit trickier because the light weight (larger diameter than nano pro uses less carbon for same spine) arrows will resonate faster, showing a higher dynamic spine.

I think that for Nano Pro arrows, finding the right spine with Carbon Ones and then upgrading can be a good strategy.


----------



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

Hi everyone, thanks again for all the reply's.

Arrows are cut,31-1/4 throat of nock to the tip of the point. , 110 grain points are in, will shoot tomorrow and report back. Beiter nocks, light blue, 12-2. Spin wings 1.75 yellow.

Jim


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Jim, for future reference, you don't include the point with the shaft length. That gives you a 30 1/2" shaft length.

Hope it works out for you.

Hmmm. Blue and yellow. "Colgate" is a Ukrainian name?


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

HikerDave, instead of glue, would you get away with jamming the pin nocks in with Cling-Film?


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

Greysides said:


> HikerDave, instead of glue, would you get away with jamming the pin nocks in with Cling-Film?


I think that if I did that I might as well use the Carbon Express post nocks. Interesting idea on the press fit nock pins, though. Does anyone else actually do this?


----------



## hwjchan (Oct 24, 2011)

Dave, I actually press fit all my pins in my Nano XRs. As far as direct impacts, it seems to work fine. If I hit anything too hard, like bouncing one off a steel frame, some times the nock pin might be ejected, but I generally haven't had any problems with it. The red stock pins fit just fine in my 830s.


----------



## Jim Colgate (Jun 12, 2012)

Wow! These arrows fly great! Right out of the box Carbon One 550, the bare shaft is shooting just about 2-3 inches to the left, and 3 inches high of the fletched arrows at 25 meters, about 11 oclock is if your facing the center, and completely level and straight.
Shaft length 30 1/2 thanks Stash! 110 grain point.
brace height 8 7/8
limbs MK Korea Prime Medium 68/38lbs, WinStar II 25" handle, low grip
tiller bottom limb 7" Top limb 7 1/4"
nock point 3/8th above center with brass nocking point for now.
center shot is just outside the string blur to the left and button pressure i would say is medium to slightly firm.

Just need a little adjustment to make them ideal? 
Question how should i fine tune with tiller adjustment, weight adjustment, button pressure. I also notice the bow seems slightly loud and wondering how to adjust tiller/brace height to quiet the shot abit.

Finally, THANK YOU to everyone for your valuable Input, and special thanks to John/Limbwalker for the 550 spine reccomendation. I was sure 500 spine as some mentioned would be ideal according to the charts etc, but for my particular setup, the 550 as John mentioned turned out to be right on the money!! 

Thanks again all, :set1_applaud:
Jim
:aero:


----------



## Zbone (Aug 4, 2012)

New guy here, thanx for all the great info, but you guys just lost me with "press fit" Is a special tool needed to press fit?... Thanx


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

I'd start by adjusting nock height to get the bareshafts level or justly slightly under the fletched.

Only adjust one thing at a time.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Greysides said:


> HikerDave, instead of glue, would you get away with jamming the pin nocks in with Cling-Film?


Drat! I meant to say *jam in the pins* with cling film or a plastic shopping bag.

Glue in once tuning is finished if necessary.


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

Never glue, if using Beiter nocks. Rather use plumbers tape.


----------

