# GMX vs Samick Ultra?



## Acehero (Nov 2, 2007)

I have a Masters and have recently bought a GMX after trying a friends for same issues you worry about - spares. It took me 6 months to get hold of a spare Masters grip (though I think they are easier to get hold of now) so I could try modifying the original without fear of breaking it - which i did  The GMX is a very nice bow, the grip options and availability of parts is a definate plus point, and it has a back bushing for weights which i find gives me another option. I don't find it shoots any better or worse than my Masters, but it does give you more options certainly. I'm thinking of actually replacing the Masters with a second GMX someday. Getting hold of spare grips, limbolts, nuts, etc easily is definately a good selling point for Hoyt.


----------



## s26286603 (Jul 13, 2008)

well the samick is a copy of a hoyt avalon......


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

No question the Agulla Ultra has proven itself with medals and WR's over the years...

However, I don't see how on earth a person could go wrong with a GMX. I'll admit that's one sweet riser. Very simple and very effective with great finish and all the right bushings in the right places...

John.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

I own both though the Ultra has been lent out to various people in my club over the 9 or so years I have owned it. As John noted, I would take the GMX. For many years I shot a set up like John and Butch do-no V-bars and the Agulla Ultra does not have a backweight bushing. The finish on the hoyt is much more durable. The ultra is a great riser though.


----------

