# Is there a difference between IBO speeds and ATA speeds?



## Fish Bonez (Nov 25, 2008)

Hoyt Archery: Maker of the World's Best Bows For those with questions regarding ATA/IBO velocity: ATA speeds are 70 lbs, 30 in. draw at 5 grains per lb. IBO speed is commonly believed to also be tested at 70/30. However, in actuality, the IBO standards allow for speeds to be tested at poundages as high as 82 lbs as long as the arrow is at 5 grains per lb. By going with ATA spec, we eliminate any question as to how we test our speed. REAL SPEED. REAL NUMBERS.


----------



## Fish Bonez (Nov 25, 2008)

Is the ATA hoyt is quoting the Archery Trade Association ?


----------



## roosclan (Oct 1, 2010)

Thanks! That helps some. Most other manufacturers I see list the IBO speed, but they specify that it is at 70# and 30", just like Hoyt, so I don't really see where it makes that much of a difference, except in lighter bows, perhaps.


----------



## vnhill1981 (Apr 17, 2009)

Actually AMO is 540 grains at 60# and 30" (9 grains per inch). I don't believe it's a misprint, look at 2011 PSE ratings, they use "ATA/IBO" speed rating, if Hoyt was stating "ATA" speeds as being AMO speeds, this would mean the 35" Carbon Matrix would have an "IBO" speed rating of 354 FPS. (please understand not trying to talk bad about Hoyt, just saying I don't think that bow is pushing those speeds). With that being said, the fact that the Carbon Element goes down to 25" draw length has definately got me looking.


----------



## vnhill1981 (Apr 17, 2009)

corrections on my last for Hoyt 35" Carbon Matrix if it had AMO speed of 318
using following calculations:
318 + 63.08 + 16.6 = 397 FPS "IBO" speed
540 (grains)- 350 (grains) = 190 / 5 = 38 x 1.66 = 63.08 FPS added
70# - 60# = 10# x 1.66 = 16.6 FPS added


----------



## Aceman (Oct 28, 2003)

This is the comment on Hoyt's facebook page concerning ATA speed.

For those with questions regarding ATA/IBO velocity: ATA speeds are 70 lbs, 30 in. draw at 5 grains per lb. IBO speed is commonly believed to also be tested at 70/30. However, in actuality, the IBO standards allow for speeds to be tested at poundages as high as 82 lbs as long as the arrow is at 5 grains per lb. By going with ATA spec, we eliminate any question as to how we test our speed. REAL SPEED. REAL NUMBERS.


----------



## SwampLife (Jul 3, 2010)

vnhill1981 said:


> corrections on my last for Hoyt 35" Carbon Matrix if it had AMO speed of 318
> using following calculations:
> 318 + 63.08 + 16.6 = 397 FPS "IBO" speed
> 540 (grains)- 350 (grains) = 190 / 5 = 38 x 1.66 = 63.08 FPS added
> 70# - 60# = 10# x 1.66 = 16.6 FPS added


Good math but if you had read post #2 it could of saved you alot of work.


----------



## vnhill1981 (Apr 17, 2009)

SwampLife said:


> Good math but if you had read post #2 it could of saved you alot of work.


Yeah I know, just seems stupid now, but there was a comment just before mine that stated they believed that Post#2 was a misprint and that they believed Hoyt was using AMO standards. But they also said AMO standards were 540 grains @70# and 30"draw. I guess that post was deleted for some reason.


----------



## Hoythunter01 (Oct 23, 2005)

Fish Bonez said:


> Hoyt Archery: Maker of the World's Best Bows For those with questions regarding ATA/IBO velocity: ATA speeds are 70 lbs, 30 in. draw at 5 grains per lb. IBO speed is commonly believed to also be tested at 70/30. However, in actuality, the IBO standards allow for speeds to be tested at poundages as high as 82 lbs as long as the arrow is at 5 grains per lb. By going with ATA spec, we eliminate any question as to how we test our speed. REAL SPEED. REAL NUMBERS.





Aceman said:


> This is the comment on Hoyt's facebook page concerning ATA speed.
> 
> For those with questions regarding ATA/IBO velocity: ATA speeds are 70 lbs, 30 in. draw at 5 grains per lb. IBO speed is commonly believed to also be tested at 70/30. However, in actuality, the IBO standards allow for speeds to be tested at poundages as high as 82 lbs as long as the arrow is at 5 grains per lb. By going with ATA spec, we eliminate any question as to how we test our speed. REAL SPEED. REAL NUMBERS.


I read that somewhere.....


----------



## bfisher (Nov 30, 2002)

I'd like to know if these ATA specs are int their manuals. I just got off their website and there is nothing mentioned about arrow/speed requirements, etc. It may be in one of their manuals, but that costs $30 for non-ATA members. The last I ever heard of ATA requirements was many years ago and it was indeed called AMO at the time. And it was as stated above at 9 gr/lb of draw weight; 60#, 30" draw, and 540 gr. arrow. Bow manufacturers back then listed both AMO and IBO speeds. For isntance a bow might have an AMO speed of 245 fps and an IBO speed of 305 fps. Has the ATA adopted a new policy?

Just to be clear on this neither of these (ATA or IBO) are within the realm of realism. For one thing very few people shoot or should be shooting a 30" draw and the majority can't even draw a 70 lb. bow. And the specs allow for some variances. There should be no variance whatsoever. 30" is 30", not 30 3/4". 70# is 70#, not 73#.

The old AMO specs are not all that accurate either, any more. I don't know of anybody that shoots a 540 gr arrow, especially at 60#.

Personally, I think a nice medium would be to rate bows at 28", somewhere in the middle of what most people shoot. And it wouldn't do any harm to check the bows at both 60# and 70# and publish both numbers. Arrow weight? How about going back to 6 gr/lb for an average.


----------



## vnhill1981 (Apr 17, 2009)

bfisher said:


> I'd like to know if these ATA specs are int their manuals. I just got off their website and there is nothing mentioned about arrow/speed requirements, etc. It may be in one of their manuals, but that costs $30 for non-ATA members. The last I ever heard of ATA requirements was many years ago and it was indeed called AMO at the time. And it was as stated above at 9 gr/lb of draw weight; 60#, 30" draw, and 540 gr. arrow. Bow manufacturers back then listed both AMO and IBO speeds. For isntance a bow might have an AMO speed of 245 fps and an IBO speed of 305 fps. Has the ATA adopted a new policy?
> 
> Just to be clear on this neither of these (ATA or IBO) are within the realm of realism. For one thing very few people shoot or should be shooting a 30" draw and the majority can't even draw a 70 lb. bow. And the specs allow for some variances. There should be no variance whatsoever. 30" is 30", not 30 3/4". 70# is 70#, not 73#.
> 
> ...


Amen brother, you push it I'll back it, these would be more "real world" numbers and would let you know what you are more likely to expect, BOW MANUFACTURERS OR ANYONE ASSOCIATED WITH THEM PLEASE READ THIS


----------



## bfisher (Nov 30, 2002)

ttt


----------



## DONDEERE (Sep 24, 2007)

bfisher said:


> I'd like to know if these ATA specs are int their manuals. I just got off their website and there is nothing mentioned about arrow/speed requirements, etc. It may be in one of their manuals, but that costs $30 for non-ATA members. The last I ever heard of ATA requirements was many years ago and it was indeed called AMO at the time. And it was as stated above at 9 gr/lb of draw weight; 60#, 30" draw, and 540 gr. arrow. Bow manufacturers back then listed both AMO and IBO speeds. For isntance a bow might have an AMO speed of 245 fps and an IBO speed of 305 fps. Has the ATA adopted a new policy?
> 
> Just to be clear on this neither of these (ATA or IBO) are within the realm of realism. For one thing very few people shoot or should be shooting a 30" draw and the majority can't even draw a 70 lb. bow. And the specs allow for some variances. There should be no variance whatsoever. 30" is 30", not 30 3/4". 70# is 70#, not 73#.
> 
> ...


_*...HEERE, HEERE...I am down with that BIG TIME :darkbeer:

...stop the hype and "lets get real" :shade:*_


----------



## bfisher (Nov 30, 2002)

DONDEERE said:


> _*...HEERE, HEERE...I am down with that BIG TIME :darkbeer:
> 
> ...stop the hype and "lets get real" :shade:*_


Explain why, please.


----------



## vnhill1981 (Apr 17, 2009)

bfisher said:


> Explain why, please.


What Dondeere is saying is that he also agrees with what was said


----------



## bukfever2 (Feb 16, 2011)

Aceman said:


> This is the comment on Hoyt's facebook page concerning ATA speed.
> 
> For those with questions regarding ATA/IBO velocity: ATA speeds are 70 lbs, 30 in. draw at 5 grains per lb. IBO speed is commonly believed to also be tested at 70/30. However, in actuality, the IBO standards allow for speeds to be tested at poundages as high as 82 lbs as long as the arrow is at 5 grains per lb. By going with ATA spec, we eliminate any question as to how we test our speed. REAL SPEED. REAL NUMBERS.


Just found this about ATA vs. IBO


----------



## robbbinhoodx (Feb 25, 2010)

vnhill1981 said:


> corrections on my last for Hoyt 35" Carbon Matrix if it had AMO speed of 318
> using following calculations:
> 318 + 63.08 + 16.6 = 397 FPS "IBO" speed
> 540 (grains)- 350 (grains) = 190 / 5 = 38 x 1.66 = 63.08 FPS added
> 70# - 60# = 10# x 1.66 = 16.6 FPS added


ATA not AMMO. one is 5 grains per pound, ATA, and Ammo is 9 grains per pound just to clarify it!


----------



## MightyElkHntr (Dec 13, 2006)

What difference does it make? If you shoot a bow at 70lbs, 28 inches through a chrono with a 350 grain arrow (5gr/lb), it'll be pretty close to both ATA and IBO speeds specified at 30 inches if you deduct 10fps for every inch of decrease in draw length. For poundage, for every 10lbs up or down from 70lbs you'd add or subtract 25fps and it comes out pretty close to that too... for every 25 grains of additional arrow weight over 5gr/lb, you'll lose approx 10fps... All this arguing isn't worth the energy spent doing it... it all comes out pretty close to the same number - and that is REAL WORLD #'s.


----------



## texhoyt (Nov 7, 2008)

I don't know the answer, but hoyt bows always shoot faster than the advertised speeds. Mathews always shoot slower if you compare apples to apples. like the new z7 extreme is supposed to shoot 300+ and the CRX 32 is rated at 323. With the exact same arrow of 385 grains, the hoyt is a tad faster. Hmmm, you got me.


----------



## Mac of Michigan (Mar 26, 2009)

Hoyt *hasn't* always shot advertised speeds! *Only Darton has!!!* Hoyt does show 'advertising genius' though!! ATA as the 'new and consistent' standard - novel idea!!!:wink:


texhoyt said:


> I don't know the answer, but hoyt bows always shoot faster than the advertised speeds. Mathews always shoot slower if you compare apples to apples. like the new z7 extreme is supposed to shoot 300+ and the CRX 32 is rated at 323. With the exact same arrow of 385 grains, the hoyt is a tad faster. Hmmm, you got me.


----------



## Foam Gnome (Sep 22, 2011)

vnhill1981 said:


> Actually AMO is 540 grains at 60# and 30" (9 grains per inch). I don't believe it's a misprint, look at 2011 PSE ratings, they use "ATA/IBO" speed rating, if Hoyt was stating "ATA" speeds as being AMO speeds, this would mean the 35" Carbon Matrix would have an "IBO" speed rating of 354 FPS. (please understand not trying to talk bad about Hoyt, just saying I don't think that bow is pushing those speeds). With that being said, the fact that the Carbon Element goes down to 25" draw length has definately got me looking.


\
Hoyt doesnt rate it that high, it means Hoyt at 320 is equivelent to 350 the way most other manufacturers rate.


----------



## Big Rack Buck (Jan 15, 2011)

Okay, I have to throw my two cents in. I shoot Hoyt because I like their bows and durability, but about 4-5 yrs ago when I was looking to switch to Mathews-Switchback XT I became very disenchanted by the speeds they were claiming vs. reality for a person shooting 67 lbs @ 29" draw. I have never liked the IBO standards as it leaves too much to chance with a now that may be more efficient with a 5gr/lb. arrow than what I use for hunting or even 3D. Many of the top bow manufacturers have become very crafty with regards to this standard which is why they use IBO and not ATA or AMO, I think for today's standards ATA is the closest we have to creating a level playing field for real life. I do concur with the one comment about creating a new standard that all bow manufacturers must use ie. 29" draw length (actual) 65lbs. Draw weight @ 6gr/lb. or a 390gr. Arrow all this shot at a standard distance from a chronograph. I know at the end of the day when you slip an arrow through the lungs of a big buck it doesn't matter whether your arrow is going 300 or 320 fps, but when you are forking out between $800-$1399, you don't want to be hoodwinked when your buddy shows up with a Hoyt and his bow is shooting 10-15 fps faster with all things equal. Ha ha...I had to. Either way we work too hard to be jacked around by statistics which the average guy doesn't want to get into. Just give me the facts we want to shoot! I can't speak for all years, but all the Hoyt bows I have tested or seen tested do shoot faster than advertised? Go figure...I do love my Carbon Element-RKT Most of the top bow makers make great bows, it's your preference.


----------



## Buster of Xs (Nov 28, 2008)

ATA is just a test with tighter tolerances than the IBO rating. No more and no less. Less fudge factor with ATA.


----------



## Mac of Michigan (Mar 26, 2009)

Buster of Xs said:


> ATA is just a test with tighter tolerances than the IBO rating. No more and no less. Less fudge factor with ATA.


I'll bet someone will figure out a way to 'spin' it! After all...only in America could a show titled *Spin* *City* be a huge success.:wink:


----------



## SonnyThomas (Sep 10, 2006)

bfisher said:


> I'd like to know if these ATA specs are int their manuals. I just got off their website and there is nothing mentioned about arrow/speed requirements, etc. It may be in one of their manuals, but that costs $30 for non-ATA members. The last I ever heard of ATA requirements was many years ago and it was indeed called AMO at the time. And it was as stated above at 9 gr/lb of draw weight; 60#, 30" draw, and 540 gr. arrow. Bow manufacturers back then listed both AMO and IBO speeds. For isntance a bow might have an AMO speed of 245 fps and an IBO speed of 305 fps. Has the ATA adopted a new policy?
> 
> Just to be clear on this neither of these (ATA or IBO) are within the realm of realism. For one thing very few people shoot or should be shooting a 30" draw and the majority can't even draw a 70 lb. bow. And the specs allow for some variances. *There should be no variance whatsoever. 30" is 30", not 30 3/4". 70# is 70#, not 73#.* The old AMO specs are not all that accurate either, any more. I don't know of anybody that shoots a 540 gr arrow, especially at 60#.
> 
> Personally, I think a nice medium would be to rate bows at 28", somewhere in the middle of what most people shoot. And it wouldn't do any harm to check the bows at both 60# and 70# and publish both numbers. Arrow weight? How about going back to 6 gr/lb for an average.


What bfisher said, that I have in bold. Forget AMO, IBO, ATA. At one time the Archery Trade Association was the AMO, Archery Manufacturer Organization. Whether AMO of old or ATA of new neither had or have Archery Police of any kind that we know of. Okay, no one to enforce that 28" advertised bow draws exactly 28" properly set up and so on. In fact, it has been pointed out that there are bows on the market that draw well over a inch longer than the quoted or given draw length. If so, then I think they should be held liable for false advertising.

US Archer; Robert Ragsdale article quote draw length varying severely from one manufacturer to another and even the same model of bow year to year of make.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

The old amo standard was established before ibo even existed. Back then, there wasn't but a few arrows sizes to choose from so getting an arrows at 5 gpp was impossible. That is why they used 9 gpp. Most bows back then were made in 30 inch draw so the amo adopted that as the average draw length.

IBO came about when 3d shooter needed a standard that was closer to what they were shooting. So the 5 gpp was adopted. Usually ibo is about 70 fps faster than amo. Overdraws and lighter arrows made it possible to get to 5 gpp.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

SonnyThomas said:


> What bfisher said, that I have in bold. Forget AMO, IBO, ATA. At one time the Archery Trade Association was the AMO, Archery Manufacturer Organization. Whether AMO of old or ATA of new neither had or have Archery Police of any kind that we know of. Okay, no one to enforce that 28" advertised bow draws exactly 28" properly set up and so on. In fact, it has been pointed out that there are bows on the market that draw well over a inch longer than the quoted or given draw length. If so, then *I think they should be held liable for false advertising.*
> US Archer; Robert Ragsdale article quote draw length varying severely from one manufacturer to another and even the same model of bow year to year of make.


That is why you see most using the term, " speeds UP TO 345 fps" That way, they are covered.


----------



## Alpha Burnt (Sep 12, 2005)

It is a shame that even at a Cub Scout pine wood derby you have rules that are more precise and have to be followed more stringently than major manufacturers of very expensive adult bow hunting equipment. Consumers want the truth, we need an independent testing place that all manufacturers agree to and publish their independent numbers only (UL listing of sorts). Who shoots 30/70 at 5 grains per pound anyway? I know no one that does.


----------



## fletched (May 10, 2006)

Alpha Burnt said:


> It is a shame that even at a Cub Scout pine wood derby you have rules that are more precise and have to be followed more stringently than major manufacturers of very expensive adult bow hunting equipment. Consumers want the truth, we need an independent testing place that all manufacturers agree to and publish their independent numbers only (UL listing of sorts). *Who shoots 30/70 at 5 grains per pound anyway*? I know no one that does.


Not many shoot those poundages and draw lengths today but you have to consider that when ibo was established, 70 pounds or more was common and a lot of people shot 30" draw lengths to get the extra speeds. Ibo had to establish the 5gpp rule because people were blowing up there bows trying to gain speed. It was a good standard in it's day. It is still usable today but just like any standard, there has to be some math to determine poundaged and draw lengths variations.


----------



## bambieslayer (Apr 7, 2010)

funny my draw length measures 28.5" from sternum to wrist wrinkle (no funny comments please)my old pse carroll intruder is 28.5" fit perfect the 06 powertec is 28.5" my 07 allegiance had 28.5" mods fit perfect my 2011 destroyer is set on 27" according to the charts why the 1.5" difference ? next who actualy shoots 5 gpp? have not setup the zuess yet bought 28" mods


----------



## Mac of Michigan (Mar 26, 2009)

Actually a lot of IBO competitors shoot 5 grains per inch! That is the only competitive discipline that I know of that encourages 'chasing speed'. A lot of the speed bows were developed for IBO competitors. Not sure why anymore, 'cause you get great speed with heavier arrows these days! But they still shoot light arrows for the tournaments.


----------



## Alpha Burnt (Sep 12, 2005)

fletched said:


> Not many shoot those poundages and draw lengths today but you have to consider that when ibo was established, 70 pounds or more was common and a lot of people shot 30" draw lengths to get the extra speeds. Ibo had to establish the 5gpp rule because people were blowing up there bows trying to gain speed. It was a good standard in it's day. It is still usable today but just like any standard, there has to be some math to determine poundaged and draw lengths variations.


Yes, I agree but would it not be most useful to take the most common draw length sold and test with the most commonly used arrow weights at the most commonly used poundage to arrive at these numbers and save people a lot of math. I would say 29" draw length, 375 gn arrow and 60 pounds. When the test is completed, the bow should be dead at 60# and within 1/4" of stated draw (+ or - 1/8") to the part of the valley exhibiting the highest letoff. The bow should be set to manufacturer specifications (if any are published) for a2a and bh and timed and synchronized. I believe these parameters would be most useful to the consumer for real world comparisons and would not be pipe dreams like most manufacturers stated speeds and stated draw lengths. It is a shame as I said in an earlier post.


----------



## Alpha Burnt (Sep 12, 2005)

Manufacturers, I hope you read these posts.


----------



## roosclan (Oct 1, 2010)

Alpha Burnt said:


> Manufacturers, I hope you read these posts.


Until the IBO changes their specifications, manufacturers won't change. If one does and others don't, the one that changes will be at an advertising disadvantage, which can affect sales.


----------



## Aceman (Oct 28, 2003)

roosclan said:


> Until the IBO changes their specifications, manufacturers won't change. If one does and others don't, the one that changes will be at an advertising disadvantage, which can affect sales.


Hoyt did do this last year and I really don't think they are at much of a disadvantage. On paper they might look like it but the guy behind the counter should be able to explain that anything PSE or Mathews tells you as far as speed goes you have to take with a grain of salt. That is not true with a Hoyt. Nothing against PSE or Mathews they have awesome bows but when Hoyt tells you what the ATA speed of the bow is they are not inflating any numbers.


----------



## roosclan (Oct 1, 2010)

Aceman said:


> Hoyt did do this last year and I really don't think they are at much of a disadvantage. On paper they might look like it but the guy behind the counter should be able to explain that anything PSE or Mathews tells you as far as speed goes you have to take with a grain of salt. That is not true with a Hoyt. Nothing against PSE or Mathews they have awesome bows but when Hoyt tells you what the ATA speed of the bow is they are not inflating any numbers.


Yes, but there's a big difference between using ATA specs (70# at 30", 5gpp) vs IBO specs (which most places advertise they use 70# at 30", 5gpp), and completely changing things by dropping 10# DW, losing an inch or two on DL and using a heavier arrow. 

Personally, I think ATA and IBO should both change to 28" DL, 60# DW and a 400gr arrow with a 18gr peep, 40gr of string silencers on the string, a D-loop and a nock. Anyone who doesn't want the nock gains speed, anyone who wants lighter silencers gains speed, and anyone who uses a lighter peep gains speed. It's a win-win for the manufacturers as folks will have bows that end up shooting over the stated speeds or right at them most of the time instead of under-speed. They should also hold manufacturers to tighter DL specifications only allowing 1/8" variation. It's easy to gain a few extra fps when you test your bows at a so-called 30", but that so-called 30" DL is actually 30.5" with a bare string (especially no silencers), then sell the bow with silencers. Bows should be tested in the exact same configuration as they will be sold. If there are silencers on the string when sold, then they should be on the string when tested.


----------



## WilsonLast (Oct 17, 2012)

Hi,

You may also check this video on what an ATA is. It is based on Ozeki Phone System XE and it fairly explains ATA connection options and VoIP:
http://www.ozekiphone.com/what-is-ata-347.html

BR


----------



## Arob542 (Jul 9, 2012)

IMO they should stop posting any kind of speeds and lets get back to shooting a bow by how it shoots and not how fast it shoots. Lmao :wink::wink: like that will ever happen


----------



## DRock (Sep 7, 2012)

They will never adopt a system of shooting a lesser poundage with a shorter draw...and that is for one simple reason. People buy these speed bows for that "big dick internet number" so they can brag to everyone online about how fast their bow shoots.

If they went to say 65# and 28" the numbers would drop and people would get very confused...

Buy a bow for how well YOU can shoot it and not because you want to brag about it online and to your friends.


----------



## JBK (Feb 27, 2009)

MightyElkHntr said:


> What difference does it make? If you shoot a bow at 70lbs, 28 inches through a chrono with a 350 grain arrow (5gr/lb), it'll be pretty close to both ATA and IBO speeds specified at 30 inches if you deduct 10fps for every inch of decrease in draw length. For poundage, for every 10lbs up or down from 70lbs you'd add or subtract 25fps and it comes out pretty close to that too... for every 25 grains of additional arrow weight over 5gr/lb, you'll lose approx 10fps... All this arguing isn't worth the energy spent doing it... it all comes out pretty close to the same number - and that is REAL WORLD #'s.


Seems pretty logical....am I the only one who read this?


----------



## cinchup1973 (Oct 19, 2011)

Its logical as long as the manufacturer uses the ATA standard, its not as close as you might be led to believe. One bow no names is ATA rated at 330 if I take said bow, remove the vanes, go to bare string and a blade rest with the allowable variance in draw length and variance in poundage I can get the bow up to 352. Big difference! I much prefer the ATA which is actually old AMO thats been revamped. 

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## JBK (Feb 27, 2009)

cinchup1973 said:


> Its logical as long as the manufacturer uses the ATA standard, its not as close as you might be led to believe. One bow no names is ATA rated at 330 if I take said bow, remove the vanes, go to bare string and a blade rest with the allowable variance in draw length and variance in poundage I can get the bow up to 352. Big difference! I much prefer the ATA which is actually old AMO thats been revamped.
> 
> Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


You are correct for the "debate" portion of this thread, it is a play on any number of things, designed to muddy the waters. However, no one uses their bow to any extent of the things being discussed....the ATA/IBO/AMO are merely guides for vague consideration. Rig out your hunting/competition/3D bow and shoot thru a chrono and THERE WE WILL HAVE it....Logic


----------



## cinchup1973 (Oct 19, 2011)

My bow is so close to ATA, exactly to ATA rules except the draw length, ATA requires a peep and loop to be installed. It also requires vanes on the arrows used so I believe its more Accurate. 
To really hold the manufacturers feet to the fire there needs to be a 3rd party inspector such as the ATA to verify specs. There are good arguments for this and good ones against it also.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## ColoradoHunter (Nov 20, 2006)

Aceman said:


> Hoyt did do this last year and I really don't think they are at much of a disadvantage. On paper they might look like it but the guy behind the counter should be able to explain that anything PSE or Mathews tells you as far as speed goes you have to take with a grain of salt. That is not true with a Hoyt. Nothing against PSE or Mathews they have awesome bows but when Hoyt tells you what the ATA speed of the bow is they are not inflating any numbers.


PSE started using the ATA standard back in at least 2011. I think it was actually a year or two before that, but I don't have the older books to check.


----------



## cinchup1973 (Oct 19, 2011)

Hoyt started in October of 2009 when the AMO changed to ATA and PSE started in 2011. This post is from 2010.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2


----------



## THE ELKMAN (Jan 2, 2013)

Truth...



big rack buck said:


> okay, i have to throw my two cents in. I shoot hoyt because i like their bows and durability, but about 4-5 yrs ago when i was looking to switch to mathews-switchback xt i became very disenchanted by the speeds they were claiming vs. Reality for a person shooting 67 lbs @ 29" draw. I have never liked the ibo standards as it leaves too much to chance with a now that may be more efficient with a 5gr/lb. Arrow than what i use for hunting or even 3d. Many of the top bow manufacturers have become very crafty with regards to this standard which is why they use ibo and not ata or amo, i think for today's standards ata is the closest we have to creating a level playing field for real life. I do concur with the one comment about creating a new standard that all bow manufacturers must use ie. 29" draw length (actual) 65lbs. Draw weight @ 6gr/lb. Or a 390gr. Arrow all this shot at a standard distance from a chronograph. I know at the end of the day when you slip an arrow through the lungs of a big buck it doesn't matter whether your arrow is going 300 or 320 fps, but when you are forking out between $800-$1399, you don't want to be hoodwinked when your buddy shows up with a hoyt and his bow is shooting 10-15 fps faster with all things equal. Ha ha...i had to. Either way we work too hard to be jacked around by statistics which the average guy doesn't want to get into. Just give me the facts we want to shoot! I can't speak for all years, but all the hoyt bows i have tested or seen tested do shoot faster than advertised? Go figure...i do love my carbon element-rkt most of the top bow makers make great bows, it's your preference.


----------

