# Tuning the plunger



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

Oh man what a day! High heat, uv and humidity, out on the sun at my archery Club trying to tune my plunger. I've got the app called Apptitune and was following the instructions to tune my plunger using first the walk back method. No problems there but when I tried doing the bare shaft/ fletched shaft method to tune the dampening I ended up getting the bare and fletched moving a little closer together but mainly the whole group was going to the right. I even ran out of adjustment in the plunger. Then in the end I gave up, but did notice that my brace height was below where I set it at the start.

The following is pasted ftom Apptitune. ...
Alternate Bare and Fletched - When doing the final bare-shaft tune, shoot the fletched shafts and bare shafts in alternating fashion: one fletched, one bare, one fletched one bare and so on.

Do this with at least 3 of each, so that you do not get a false reading on a bad arrow or a poorly shot one. Alternating in this manner helps prevent the shooter from treating the arrows differently and getting a different arrow flight because of it.

For a right-handed shooter, if the bare shafts land to the right of the fletched shafts (yellow arrow and nocks in picture below,) they are too weak and adjustments need to be made. If the bare shafts land to the left of the fletched ones (green arrow and nocks in picture below,) the arrows are too stiff.

And....
Ways to Make Arrows Act Weaker:

Increase bow weight
Increase point weight
Increase arrow length
Increase brace height
Decrease plunger tension
Increase strand count in string*
Use regular nocks (pin nocks stiffen arrow)
Use a longer bow (72" vs. 70")
Ways to Make Arrows Act Stiffer:

Decrease bow weight
Decrease point weight
Decrease arrow length
Decrease brace height
Increase plunger tension
Decrease strand count in string*
Use pin nocks over regular nocks
Use a shorter bow (68" vs. 70")

I followed these instructions so what have I missed? Is it possible to get bare and fletched to group? Another article said to simply set the plunger between 300-400 grams of pressure? 

Officially confused.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

TargetOz said:


> Oh man what a day! High heat, uv and humidity, out on the sun at my archery Club trying to tune my plunger. I've got the app called Apptitune and was following the instructions to tune my plunger using first the walk back method. No problems there but when I tried doing the bare shaft/ fletched shaft method to tune the dampening I ended up getting the bare and fletched moving a little closer together but mainly the whole group was going to the right. I even ran out of adjustment in the plunger. Then in the end I gave up, but did notice that my brace height was below where I set it at the start.
> 
> The following is pasted ftom Apptitune. ...
> Alternate Bare and Fletched - When doing the final bare-shaft tune, shoot the fletched shafts and bare shafts in alternating fashion: one fletched, one bare, one fletched one bare and so on.
> ...


Yes, it's possible to get fletched and bare shafts to group together. For me, it was a hard-won thing, but that probably just proves how 'possible' it is.

20yd:








60yd:


----------



## anmactire (Sep 4, 2012)

TargetOz said:


> Use a longer bow (72" vs. 70")
> 
> Use a shorter bow (68" vs. 70")


I would like to know how this worked, unless it's just a further effect of the increase or decrease in brace height that would be seen from changing bow length. Never even a variable I considered for tuning an arrow.

Yes as iksseven says it can be done. Most folks would set the arrow up so the point is to the left of the centreline (read string line for a correctly set up limb riser combo) for a right handed shooter. They would then tune from there starting with medium spring tension. The idea being that the arrow will need to be out of center by some amount to work correctly and that the medium tension gives you equal room to move on the tension both up and down.

Personally I start with arrows as long as possible with my clicker set up and set the poundage where I am comfortable. Usually this initially gives me a weak reading and I cut until they work. If they don't start to get close to correct by the time the point is "inside" the riser I start to consider stiffer shafts. I have never found point weight on certain arrows to be helpful as clipping a break off section results in more of the arrow flexing to match the few grains removed.

Plunger stiffness is only really useful to move the group to correspond with a centered sight pin setting and has marginal if any effect on tune. If it a case of the fletched and bare are together on target at all distances but both are right of center then you should see about a stiffer spring and making sure your arrow isn't set up inside centershot.

Ensure your bow is on plane as per limbwalker's method first. Set your arrow up so when you look down the bow from the back that the point is just to the left of the string. Set your plunger to medium tension, either with the adjustment on it or with the medium spring if various springs were provided. Shoot your bare and fletched shafts at a couple of distances to ensure that the behaviour is consistent. If the bare are left of the fletched they are stiff. If they are to the right they are weak. Solutions in order of effectiveness are as follows in my humble opinion. YMMV

Cutting the arrows shorter to stiffen.
Changing draw weight. With tiller bolts, 2nd most effective, with changing limbs MOST effective.
Changing point weight works to a certain degree, not a lot in my experience unless you have hollow insert points or wider arrows.
Changing brace height as per apptitune
String weight.

If you run out of arrow length, and poundage adjustment and things still aren't working you probably have the wrong arrows. Small adjustments to centershot can be made to tweak things but beyond center is no mans land for me.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

why are you starting with adjusting the plunger and then shooting bareshafts and fletched? I dont see how that will ever give a good result. You have to start with bareshaft and fletched first and adjust tiller bolts until they are together. 

you can get the bareshafts and fletched to group together if your arrows are the correct spine for your shot and limbs. I routinely shoot bareshafts and fletched out to 50 meters when tuning. 


I would start from scratch and use this tuning method...

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2208382&p=1069675024#post1069675024

post # 15


Chris


----------



## Dacer (Jun 10, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> why are you starting with adjusting the plunger and then shooting bareshafts and fletched? I dont see how that will ever give a good result. You have to start with bareshaft and fletched first and adjust tiller bolts until they are together.
> 
> you can get the bareshafts and fletched to group together if your arrows are the correct spine for your shot and limbs. I routinely shoot bareshafts and fletched out to 50 meters when tuning.
> 
> ...


He left out the important step of establishing a rough tune with bareshafts and fletched, before doing the finer tuning method Kaminski presents in his app show in the OP, But I'll point out that the first on his list on making arrows act weaker or stiffer is adjusting bow weight. 


Apart from that in regards to the OP - cut and pasting content directly from a paid app is bit tacky at best.


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> why are you starting with adjusting the plunger and then shooting bareshafts and fletched? I dont see how that will ever give a good result. You have to start with bareshaft and fletched first and adjust tiller bolts until they are together.
> 
> you can get the bareshafts and fletched to group together if your arrows are the correct spine for your shot and limbs. I routinely shoot bareshafts and fletched out to 50 meters when tuning.
> 
> ...


Hi Chris, thanks heaps for that link. Just 2 questions. You said to adjust the site to the centre of the string, do you leave it there when finished? And the tiller adjustment im assuming it's trial and error adjusting either or the top or bottom in and out till arrows group?


----------



## Shinken (Nov 3, 2012)

chrstphr said:


> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2208382&p=1069675024#post1069675024
> 
> post # 15
> 
> Chris


First of all, thank you for clarifying/simplifying the process for a beginner like myself. I remain confused about a few points:

1.- Setting the correct BH first. Is there a method other than by listening to sound? I find myself unable to get this by the sound method.
2.- After doing the bareshaft test and getting both sets of arrows to group, the centershot is moved to just outside the string (I'm assuming the sight pin is too so that it stays in line with the arrow point) then you recommend to adjust the spring tension using a regular spring to get the arrows to hit the center of the target. Are you talking about using only fletched arrows at this point? I am assuming correctly that by adjusting the spring tension at this point it will cause the bareshaft to separate from the fletched arrows? Are we not concerned about keeping those two types of arrows hitting at the same spot any more?
3.- Ditto for the walback tuning. At the point of doing the walkback test to correct the centershot, do we only use fletched arrows and not worry about where the bareshafts are hitting in relationship to the fletched ones anymore?

Thank you in advance.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

TargetOz said:


> Hi Chris, thanks heaps for that link. Just 2 questions. You said to adjust the site to the centre of the string, do you leave it there when finished? And the tiller adjustment im assuming it's trial and error adjusting either or the top or bottom in and out till arrows group?


Hi, you should have adjusted the tiller first to have the draw feel level during the pull and anchor. I would start out with even tiller ( string is same distance to riser at top of riser and at bottom of riser. If bow feels like it pulls upward when drawing, the lower top tiller bolt. If bow feels like its pulling downward when drawing, then lower bottom tiller bolt. Once you have bow balanced then you only move tiller bolts the same amount together. 

Usually a even to positive tiller will be your setting, unless you shoot barebow with gap or crawl. Then you may have a negative tiller. either way it doesnt matter much for shooting. but more for feel of the bow. The bow should float at full draw. 

Then you set the nocking point and brace height. Then you adjust tiller bolts TOGETHER to get bareshafts with fletched. 

Then you adjust plunger for groupings. 

When finished the sight should be over the arrow which is close to the string. 

the arrow will be mostly just off string, so sight should be the same. I have found that barrel shafts like X10s liek to be more centerline, so when i am finished, my sight, string and arrow are aligned. If i shot a parallel shaft, it would be slightly offset the string. 


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Shinken said:


> First of all, thank you for clarifying/simplifying the process for a beginner like myself. I remain confused about a few points:
> 
> 1.- Setting the correct BH first. Is there a method other than by listening to sound? I find myself unable to get this by the sound method.
> 2.- After doing the bareshaft test and getting both sets of arrows to group, the centershot is moved to just outside the string (I'm assuming the sight pin is too so that it stays in line with the arrow point) then you recommend to adjust the spring tension using a regular spring to get the arrows to hit the center of the target. Are you talking about using only fletched arrows at this point? I am assuming correctly that by adjusting the spring tension at this point it will cause the bareshaft to separate from the fletched arrows? Are we not concerned about keeping those two types of arrows hitting at the same spot any more?
> ...



Hi,

1. generally once strung, look at the string groove cut into the limb. I have found that generally the best brace height will leave 0.75 of an inch of groove showing under the string. That is a good starting place to say the least. If you sting is completely covering the string groove when bow is at rest, your brace height is too short. If you see more than 0.75 of an inch, then your brace height is too far from riser. The sound part is the bow will get very quiet and one point, and have a louder shot at other points. The louder the bow, the less efficient.

The manufacturers will give you a recommended range for your bow. That is also a great starting point. 

2. If the bareshafts and fletched group with a match stick shoved in the plunger, then when you remove the stick and put in the regular spring, they should still be grouping together. Moving my plunger pressure more or less, moves the whole group. Not bareshaft away from fletched. Plunger moves the whole group. 

3. Doing walkback tune you use fletched. However, once finished, bare shafts should still group with fletched out to 50 meters. I could shoot bareshafts as well as fletched during walkback tune and usually what i do si shoot my fletched from 5 yards out to 45 yards, and then my last two shots at 50 meters are my bare shafts. 

as a side note, you can only tune as well as you can shoot. Shooting bare shafts takes a good release and consistent form. But i feel for the most part that when someone is ready to tackle tuning, they are usually shooting consistently enough to tune. 

I cant stress enough the walk back tune from 50 yards to 5. Many times i have bare shafted at 20 yards, and had bare hafts slamming with the fletched in the 10 ring, only to discover at 30 meters or more, that the arrows were a foot stiff or weak. 

Tune for your furthest distance. Then go back and shoot 20 yards and see where the bare and fletched go. That will give you a reference for future tuning when you only have 20 yards to work with.


----------



## Shinken (Nov 3, 2012)

Thanks.


----------



## SAVILO (Jan 14, 2010)

Tag for later. Good stuff!


----------



## SlinginwithSage (Aug 1, 2012)

Your helping more than one person Thanks!


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Suggest to start reading the following chapters of THA first:

THA - Chapter 3.3 - "Fast Tuning your Olympic bow"
THA - Chapter 3.4 - "Fine Tuning your Olympic bow"

The pluger is an essential part of the fine tuning process, as it changes the center shot as well as the relative impact of the bare shaft from the fletched group. Of course, changing the plunger spring pressure moves the entire group of both fletched and unfletched arrows, but what it really changes is the relative distance between the 2 groups. Then' don't forget following points:
-1) bare shaft at the end is not a way to tune your bow but a way to retune your bow. Real fine tuning is made by looking to the smallest vertical and horizontal group. Then you mesure position of your bare shaft to be able to fast retune your bow in any situation needed.
-2) match stick system (blocked plunger) is just a starting way to tune your bow for your weakest possible arrow. A non sense at all, IMHO. 
-3) bare shaft is an amplifier of mistakes, your mistakes more than bow mistakes. It means that point of impact in relationship to the fletched group may vary a lot dpending form your shooting style and your bad habits about control of the bow arm. Everything can go wrong and bare shaft reading becomes of no use if you are NOT shooting the correct way. Week arrows may often become stiff arrows just changing the shooting style form pulling to pushing, or simply moving the cliker IN by few millimiters. 
-4) if you don't pre-select bare shafts, you will need plenty of them to get a real reading of bare shaft position, and still you will need to "guess" amond them on the target the right one...


----------



## Shinken (Nov 3, 2012)

Vittorio, I read the chapters and I am confused. I don't want to post here the material from the book so I will reference it by page and line. 
After completing the tuning up to page 49 line 9, if I am interpreting the information correctly, you use the spring tension on the plunger to get the bareshaft arrows to group with the fletched arrows on the horizontal axis. That seems to contradict what Chrstphr stated earlier and remains a point of confusion to me. Is adjusting the spring tension moving both types of arrows together or moving them relative to each other. In my short experience, I noticed that it does both but it depends on the starting point. Sometimes I see more movement of them together but at one point if I keep adjusting I see that it moves one type relative to the other.
Is the goal of basic tuning to set the centershot and set the sight pin slightly off to the side of the string and then adjust the bow poundage and spring tension so that bareshaft hit together with fletched arrows and both hit the center of the target without changing the centershot or sight pin location?


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Shinken said:


> Is adjusting the spring tension moving both types of arrows together or moving them relative to each other. In my short experience, I noticed that it does both but it depends on the starting point.


Spot on! To look at this from a lightly different viewpoint tuning is about minimizing the rotation the arrow has coming out of the bow (think what happens to a golf ball if you hook/slice it). In the same way as amplifying any archer mistakes the bare shaft will be more affected by launch rotation so if the arrow is launched rotating the bare shaft deviates more then the fletched one and the arrows hit the target horizontally at different positions. The logic is that if the fletched and bare shaft arrows hit at the same horizontal point the arrows are leaving the bow with zero rotation about a vertical axis. Fine adjustment of arrow rotation is done by adjusting the button spring tension. So if you start from a "tuned" position as you alter the spring tension both arrows will move left or right as appropriate but the bare shaft moves more than the fletched one. Bare shaft tuning is this process in reverse. The reason Vittorio needs you to be able to move the bare shaft either side of the fletched shaft with button spring adjustment only is that this nails down that you must be going through the zero rotation setting. It's possible to get false results from a bare shaft tune.

You can only modify the arrow rotation a relatively small amount from the button spring. If the tuning is way off then the button spring has no practical effect on the relative hit positions of the two shafts and that's when you get the group moving as a whole from button adjustment.

Always tune the bow you are going to shoot. So don't tune the bow and put the stabilizers on afterwards. Don't tune the bow with a matchstick in the plunger and then replace it with a spring. In both cases you are up that creek without the propulsion instrument.


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> why are you starting with adjusting the plunger and then shooting bareshafts and fletched? I dont see how that will ever give a good result. You have to start with bareshaft and fletched first and adjust tiller bolts until they are together.
> 
> you can get the bareshafts and fletched to group together if your arrows are the correct spine for your shot and limbs. I routinely shoot bareshafts and fletched out to 50 meters when tuning.
> 
> ...


Hi Chris, 

I'm confused, again. According to some of these posts they're saying ditch the match stick, then something about first tune, re tune argh! 

I followed what you wrote to the letter and I've started to get the fletched and bare arrows to group at 20m. I ran out of day light to finish it off, but when I first started the bare arrows were missing the fletched arrows by about a foot. Just as I was finishing up I couldn't believe it but both arrows were beginning to group closely. 

I'm not yet satisfied with the group and feel that I can get a tighter one, but have to really concentrate on getting my release right, coz it doesn't take much to send the bare ones of course. 

Will give an update on my progress. 

Cheers, and thanks. 
Steve.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Joe T said:


> Spot on! To look at this from a lightly different viewpoint tuning is about minimizing the rotation the arrow has coming out of the bow (think what happens to a golf ball if you hook/slice it). In the same way as amplifying any archer mistakes the bare shaft will be more affected by launch rotation so if the arrow is launched rotating the bare shaft deviates more then the fletched one and the arrows hit the target horizontally at different positions. The logic is that if the fletched and bare shaft arrows hit at the same horizontal point the arrows are leaving the bow with zero rotation about a vertical axis. Fine adjustment of arrow rotation is done by adjusting the button spring tension. So if you start from a "tuned" position as you alter the spring tension both arrows will move left or right as appropriate but the bare shaft moves more than the fletched one. Bare shaft tuning is this process in reverse. The reason Vittorio needs you to be able to move the bare shaft either side of the fletched shaft with button spring adjustment only is that this nails down that you must be going through the zero rotation setting. It's possible to get false results from a bare shaft tune.
> 
> You can only modify the arrow rotation a relatively small amount from the button spring. If the tuning is way off then the button spring has no practical effect on the relative hit positions of the two shafts and that's when you get the group moving as a whole from button adjustment.
> 
> Always tune the bow you are going to shoot. So don't tune the bow and put the stabilizers on afterwards. Don't tune the bow with a matchstick in the plunger and then replace it with a spring. In both cases you are up that creek without the propulsion instrument.


What I like since ever, Joe, is your ability to explain technically what I try to explain practically :clap: !

Thanks also to point out that tuning a bow and after that than changing something on it is a nonsense. 

People still think that tuning is a perfect science, but at least fine tuning is an art, as it needs you to understand and analize so many factors at the same time as a whole thing, and take immediate micro decisions that may have mega effects. Sometime even during on the shooting line of an important competitition.


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

Here is my question: at 18m the bareshaft groups with the fletched, but the bareshaft enters noticeably nock left (RH bow), is this a centershot issue or a plunger tension issue?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

kshet26 said:


> Here is my question: at 18m the bareshaft groups with the fletched, but the bareshaft enters noticeably nock left (RH bow), is this a centershot issue or a plunger tension issue?


this could be release, if center shot is correct.

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

TargetOz said:


> Hi Chris,
> 
> I'm confused, again. According to some of these posts they're saying ditch the match stick, then something about first tune, re tune argh!
> 
> Steve.


more than one way to skin a cat. The tuning i use and offered for advise is the tuning methods you find on the internet. 

http://www.eastonarchery.com/downloads/tuning-guide

http://www.archersreference.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/archref_04.pdf

http://www.thearcher.com/depot/resourceCentre/completetuningguide.pdf

http://www.worldarchery.org/UserFil.../Coaches_Manual_Lev2/11_Recurve_Equipment.pdf

http://texasarchery.org/Documents/T4T/TuningForTens.pdf

Now i will admit, i dont paper tune as theses guides suggest, and my bows are tuned enough that i dont need to use the matchstick in the plunger when changing arrows. But it is a method used for tuning. Perhaps it is antiquated like the paper tuning. 

Chris


----------



## ryan b. (Sep 1, 2005)

I think posting relevant and important descriptive information from an app or a book is fine in all of these cases. No one is trying to rip anyone off or pirate anything. Quotes are being cited (and referenced) for purposes of clarity. If anything, citing a direct passage from a well written book or sharing a screen shot from a good app is free marketing for the author and designer and will make them more money, not less.


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

chrstphr said:


> this could be release, if center shot is correct.
> 
> Chris


Maybe! Centershot is setup as outlined in Apptitune (parallel shaft right down the center of the string). Which is interesting as every other source says to put the end of the shaft just outside.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

TargetOz said:


> ....then something about first tune, re tune argh!


There is only one way to tune a bow and that is to group tune it. Because of the sheer number of bow, arrow and archer variables the only way to do this is by (sensible and systematic) trial and error. This is the "first" tune" and requires a high skill level and a lot of patience.

If you do a group tune and then shoot fletched and bare shaft arrows at 30 metres say then the position of the bare shaft relative to the fletched arrow is a consequence of the archer, arrow, bow set up and provides a reference to the tuned set up. If you want to check your tune you don't repeat the full blown group tune you just shoot bare shaft and fletched arrows at 30 metres and check if the relative arrow positions are those you got with the tuned set up. You can even adjust the bow, if something's changed, to move the relative arrow hit positions to the "tuned bow" ones.

Where we mortals come in is that from experience it seems that with a group tuned set up the bare and fletched arrows hit fairly close to each other at 30 metres. Although not having actually tuned the bow if we adjust the bow to bring the bare and fletched shafts close together at 30 meters the assumption is that the set up won't be too far way from what we would get if we did a group tune. This approach is validated by archers doing a bare shaft tune as a preliminary to an actual group tune.

It follows that most of these invented tuning methods are quite meaningless. They have no validity unless experimentally connected to an actual tuning process. The exception to this, in a sense, is a sensible "walk back" type method. While the walk back method doesn't tune a bow what it does do is minimize windage variation when changing distances which is worth points on the score sheet.

The same ball park approach is used for bow set up. Center shot, nocking point, spring pressure etc. are all initially set at around the positions you end up with if you do a group tune. So no point in being pedantic about being precise for these values. For bow set up you set all these values to the standard default, check for arrow clearance and then basically just adjust the draw weight so that at 20 yards the bare shaft and fletched arrows hit within around 3 inches of each other. With that setting you should be near enough for the pressure button spring to be in control of the fletched to bare shaft relative hit positions.


----------



## toys (May 29, 2009)

Speaking of rotating arrows and releases, another way I found to test with bare shafts is to stand about 6' from the target and shoot a bare shaft. The nock will be perfectly vertical if no rotation occurred, which means that the release is probably good, and you can continue with the tuning. Although one can have a bad release that "reads" good (no rotation), any rotation of the shaft means a "bad" release, and even very small flaws show up at a close distance, perfect for testing inside.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

kshet26 said:


> Here is my question: at 18m the bareshaft groups with the fletched, but the bareshaft enters noticeably nock left (RH bow), is this a centershot issue or a plunger tension issue?


With the usual disclaimer about diagnosing without visual observations - my two cents is to suspect centershot. It sounds like you need to push the arrow out away from the bow. 

Use centershot to attain same angle entry with both fletched and bare; use limb bolts to merge bare shaft groups with fletched groups; use plunger and brace height and tiller to fine tune for grouping/forgiveness.

I hope I'm steering you down the right path.


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

Damn! That's probably some of the best and most useful tuning advice I've ever seen!


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

kshet26 said:


> Here is my question: at 18m the bareshaft groups with the fletched, but the bareshaft enters noticeably nock left (RH bow), is this a centershot issue or a plunger tension issue?


Both...either....or neither....all correct answers . Just forget about bare shaft angles (it's just a consequence of the two arrow sets having different rotational characteristics). Once you get around to basic tuning (at 30 meters ) this will sort itself out.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

For example if you hold a fletched and bare shaft arrow in each hand horizontally over a piece of grass and drop them from the same height then the two arrows end up sticking in the ground at different angles. The fletched arrow will be more vertical than the bare shaft purely because it rotates faster.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> You can only modify the arrow rotation a relatively small amount from the button spring. If the tuning is way off then the button spring has no practical effect on the relative hit positions of the two shafts


A very simple concept that I wish more people would understand, and more instructors would teach...


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

I have 2 things to add 
> I find it ironic and sad that no one mentioned that perhaps the arrows you have are just too far from the optimal spine for you to get the proper tune. If your arrows are too stiff or too weak it is possible that nothing you do will adjust the dynamic spine (how the arrow flexes for your shot) enough to get a good bare shaft tune. You may have to buy new arrows

> The best tuning description I found is the Easton tuning guide Chris posted this on the first page but I'll post it again. In my experience the setup described in the guide of having the arrow slightly outside the string with a medium tension on the plunger as described in the guide as a starting point is very reasonable. If you find your self having to move and adjust a long way from that point you should take a good hard look at your arrow spine and perhaps purchase some that fit your bow more accurately.

*Become intimate with this document and if you get too wrapped around the axle with all the new ideas and concepts people are throwing at you go back and read it again...
http://www.eastonarchery.com/downloads/tuning-guide*

As a point of clarification there was a lot of discussion about arrow rotation. Fletching does cause rotation but it also introduces a lot of drag. _(Note straight fletches don't impart spin but they still make a huge difference over a bare shaft.)_ That drag force on the back of the arrow stabilizes the shaft minimizing errors, without that a bare shaft will highlight a poor setup and a poor release. This is why we bare shaft tune it is a window into the aerodynamics of the arrow and the setup. If bare shafted arrows flew as well as fletched ones we wouldn't waste our time fletching. So you can expect some variation. Having consistent groups with fletched and unfletched arrows at 50 meters shows a good setup but also shows the skill of the archer. It may be that you will need more work on your form and release to get consistent results past 30 meters with the bare shaft.

Lastly when people are tying to tune their bow I think it helps to see what an arrow is actually doing when it leaves the bow.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

b0w_bender said:


> I find it ironic and sad that no one mentioned that perhaps the arrows you have are just too far from the optimal spine for you to get the proper tune. If your arrows are too stiff or too weak it is possible that nothing you do will adjust the dynamic spine (how the arrow flexes for your shot) enough to get a good bare shaft tune. You may have to buy new arrows


I did post that. In my link to the tuning guide i had posted previously....



chrstphr said:


> http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=2208382&p=1069675024#post1069675024
> 
> post # 15
> 
> ...





chrstphr said:


> post 15........Go back to basics.
> 
> 5. Adjust *tiller bolts* on bow until bareshafts and fletched land in same group. *(if you cant get this to happen, arrows will not work for this current limb poundage).*
> 
> ...


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

I stand corrected.


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

b0w_bender said:


> Lastly when people are tying to tune their bow I think it helps to see what an arrow is actually doing when it leaves the bow.


I've seen this video several times now, but never really watched it with an eye for detail. It's striking that the arrow is in contact with the plunger for the first quarter of the arrow's oscillation right after release... and then never comes close to touching it again. Also, does the plunger even move? Barely, if at all it seems.

From that perspective, it's hard to believe it can do much of anything to affect the arrow's flight. I don't doubt that it does though, so I take it as an indication of consistency on the archer's part. I'd think any variation in form would swamp the effect of the plunger.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

gjlama94 said:


> I've seen this video several times now, but never really watched it with an eye for detail. It's striking that the arrow is in contact with the plunger for the first quarter of the arrow's oscillation right after release... and then never comes close to touching it again. Also, does the plunger even move? Barely, if at all it seems.
> 
> From that perspective, it's hard to believe it can do much of anything to affect the arrow's flight. I don't doubt that it does though, so I take it as an indication of consistency on the archer's part. I'd think any variation in form would swamp the effect of the plunger.


This video was made many years ago in order to show how the arrow comes out form the bow,not how the plunger moves. At those times, hi-speed videos were very difficult to shot and to get. In order to better show the exit of the arrow, a very week arrow tuning has been choosen, so the plunger by itself was almost clearly blocked. This is what the video shows. Of course, oscillation of the arrow and movement of the plunger are different with a stiffer arrow. I can get easily videos showing the plunger moving a lot with my F1 Casio camera.


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

b0w_bender said:


> I have 2 things to add
> > I find it ironic and sad that no one mentioned that perhaps the arrows you have are just too far from the optimal spine for you to get the proper tune. If your arrows are too stiff or too weak it is possible that nothing you do will adjust the dynamic spine (how the arrow flexes for your shot) enough to get a good bare shaft tune. You may have to buy new


Chris did mention if I was to run out of adjustment then id need to consider changing spines. Unfortunately for me I think I need to do just that. When I looked in on the Easton arrow guide I need to change from my T6's to T4's, maybe T5"s. Bit annoyed my archery shop didn't get it right for me in the first place.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

gjlama94 said:


> I've seen this video several times now, but never really watched it with an eye for detail. It's striking that the arrow is in contact with the plunger for the first quarter of the arrow's oscillation right after release... and then never comes close to touching it again. Also, does the plunger even move? Barely, if at all it seems.
> 
> From that perspective, it's hard to believe it can do much of anything to affect the arrow's flight. I don't doubt that it does though, so I take it as an indication of consistency on the archer's part. I'd think any variation in form would swamp the effect of the plunger.


If you shoot an arrow into a concrete wall then the "wall barely moves at all" but it will have quite an effect on the arrow's flight . How much the plunger moves in terms of how the arrow is effected is really a secondary effect only and is largely determined by how much the arrow bends (weak/stiff). The important property, in terms of how the arrow flight is effected, is the force between the button and the arrow shaft. This force is adjusted/controlled with the button spring tension setting. The spring pretension setting acts as a force limiter.

Also worth noting that the arrow is only in contact with the button for a very short time at the beginning of the power stroke. Bear this mind when you hear those weird stories about center shot being used to control the direction of arrow flight - as though changing center shot was like rotating the barrel of a rifle.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Here is a simple experiment:
Hold an arrow firmly point up in one hand close to the fletchings. Hold your pressure button horizontally against the shaft about 4" say from the point. Use a finger of the hand holding the the button to support the shaft so the button doesn't slip off the shaft. Push the button into the shaft until the plunger starts to slide into the barrel. Take a look at how much the shaft has bent and feel how much torque is being generated by the button on the shaft. Gives you some feel for how the button affects the arrow. And this is with zero depression of the plunger. In reality the plunder accelerates into the barrel under the shaft loading so the actual force/torque is even greater then this.

PS considering the lighting requirements I've always felt that Werner Beiter should have issued the usual disclaimer that "no archers were harmed (as in fried) in the making of this film".


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

Vittorio said:


> This video was made many years ago in order to show how the arrow comes out form the bow,not how the plunger moves. At those times, hi-speed videos were very difficult to shot and to get. In order to better show the exit of the arrow, a very week arrow tuning has been choosen, so the plunger by itself was almost clearly blocked. This is what the video shows. Of course, oscillation of the arrow and movement of the plunger are different with a stiffer arrow. I can get easily videos showing the plunger moving a lot with my F1 Casio camera.


Funny. I made the exact same observation in a previous thread which referenced this video. I was subsequently told "that arrow is perfectly tuned for that bow. You can tell because the fletchings oscillate away from the riser as they pass by." Can't find the thread, so the quote is from memory, but it's accurate enough (the quote I mean).

I don't know enough about this stuff to be able to refute or contest such a claim, though it seemed plausible.


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

Joe T said:


> If you shoot an arrow into a concrete wall then the "wall barely moves at all" but it will have quite an effect on the arrow's flight . How much the plunger moves in terms of how the arrow is effected is really a secondary effect only and is largely determined by how much the arrow bends (weak/stiff). The important property, in terms of how the arrow flight is effected, is the force between the button and the arrow shaft. This force is adjusted/controlled with the button spring tension setting. The spring pretension setting acts as a force limiter.
> 
> Also worth noting that the arrow is only in contact with the button for a very short time at the beginning of the power stroke. Bear this mind when you hear those weird stories about center shot being used to control the direction of arrow flight - as though changing center shot was like rotating the barrel of a rifle.


I'm not an expert in archery physics, but an arrow slamming into a wall is not anywhere near the same as a small, spring loaded piston in contact with an arrow's shaft for the purposes of dampening the arrow's oscillation as it leaves a bow.

I don't doubt that a plunger affects arrow flight. Too many good archers and coaches around here attest to it. My point was an archer needs to attain a certain skill level before they can begin to claim that "the plunger caused that" because form variations (release timing, plucking, wavering bow arm, torquing with bow hand, etc) will almost certainly rule. In other words, an archer needs to be pretty good to reap the benefits of the plunger.

For instance, in my case the plunger is little more than a stop. For now.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

gjlama94 said:


> Funny. I made the exact same observation in a previous thread which referenced this video. I was subsequently told "that arrow is perfectly tuned for that bow. You can tell because the fletchings oscillate away from the riser as they pass by." Can't find the thread, so the quote is from memory, but it's accurate enough (the quote I mean).
> 
> I don't know enough about this stuff to be able to refute or contest such a claim, though it seemed plausible.


Problem here is "what you were originally told" was incorrect. Arrow Selection (spine if you like) and tuning are different things. Arrow selection is getting an arrow that flexes at the right rate to wiggle its way around the riser without hitting it. As you say you want the fletchings to be moving away from the riser as they go past retaining clearance. Tuning is something different, it's about making the bow more forgiving to archer variation and hence minimizing the arrow spread (groups). Tuning is all about the aerodynamics of the arrow flight and the main connection to the bow is how much rotation the arrow has as it comes out of the bow i.e. the net torque on the arrow from the bow string and pressure button. The only way you can "see" tuning on a video is looking at the physical arrow rotation after it has left the bow or, much less likely, the deviation of the arrow flight path as a consequence of the rotation.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

gjlama94 said:


> _*I'm not an expert in archery physics*_, but an arrow slamming into a wall is not anywhere near the same as a small, spring loaded piston in contact with an arrow's shaft for the purposes of dampening the arrow's oscillation as it leaves a bow.
> 
> I don't doubt that a plunger affects arrow flight. Too many good archers and coaches around here attest to it. My point was an archer needs to attain a certain skill level before they can begin to claim that "the plunger caused that" because form variations (release timing, plucking, wavering bow arm, torquing with bow hand, etc) will almost certainly rule. In other words, an archer needs to be pretty good to reap the benefits of the plunger.
> 
> For instance, in my case the plunger is little more than a stop. For now.


*Joe T is.* 


I'm a big believer in the importance of striving for a perfectly tuned bow/arrow/archer state. An ill-tuned bow is like doing lab experiments with dirty test tubes - the results become less clear to analyze/learn/make progress.

Just doing a basic quick and dirty tune on my range bows/plungers to match the spine of the arrows available makes a very noticeable difference even with the performance of brand new students. Even for a skilled archer, it's hard to shoot a poorly tuned arrow/bow combo - with the abrasive sounds and fishtailing arrow flight and arrows in the target looking like a game of 'pick up sticks' - and 1) discern anything very useful about form consistency, or 2) enjoy the experience. But f you put a bow in the hand of a newbie that is decently tuned (relatively quiet and produces straight flying arrows), then their form improvement during the lesson becomes instantly recognizable/seen and that inevitable grin starts tugging at the corner of their mouths. Instant, tangible, satisfying visible progress ... ahhhhh.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

gjlama94 said:


> I'm not an expert in archery physics, but an arrow slamming into a wall is not anywhere near the same as a small, spring loaded piston in contact with an arrow's shaft for the purposes of dampening the arrow's oscillation as it leaves a bow.
> 
> I don't doubt that a plunger affects arrow flight. Too many good archers and coaches around here attest to it. My point was an archer needs to attain a certain skill level before they can begin to claim that "the plunger caused that" because form variations (release timing, plucking, wavering bow arm, torquing with bow hand, etc) will almost certainly rule. In other words, an archer needs to be pretty good to reap the benefits of the plunger.
> 
> For instance, in my case the plunger is little more than a stop. For now.


Maybe a bad example. The point about the wall was that although you can't see it move it does exert forces on the arrow. Just 'cos you don't see the plunger move doesn't mean it isn't exerting a force on the arrow. In fact it has to. Try shooting a right handed bow left handed and see what happens - in this case there is no force between arrow and plunger.

_in contact with an arrow's shaft for the purposes of dampening the arrow's oscillation as it leaves a bow_

Don't know where this came from but in my opinion complete nonsense.

Again my opinion but I doubt more than 10% of archers have the skill level to even do a basic bare shaft tune let alone a group tune - so here we are in agreement. Archers spend far to much time fiddling with buttons and bare shafts etc. whereas they would really improve their scores spending time on basic bow set up activities like arrow clearance and limb alignment.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> As a point of clarification there was a lot of discussion about arrow rotation. Fletching does cause rotation but it also introduces a lot of drag.


He's talking about "rotation" of the arrow around the axis of the riser, not rotation of the arrow itself. Completely different things.


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

Joe T said:


> _in contact with an arrow's shaft for the purposes of dampening the arrow's oscillation as it leaves a bow_
> 
> Don't know where this came from but in my opinion complete nonsense.


It was my original thought on how the plunger affected the arrow. Having looked at and (better) understanding the content of this thread, I realize it's a misconception on my part.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

i will preface this by saying she had a rock hard plunger. but here is slow motion of the arrow and plunger...






Chris


----------



## julle (Mar 1, 2009)

chrstphr said:


> i will preface this by saying she had a rock hard plunger. but here is slow motion of the arrow and plunger...
> 
> Chris


Rock hard meaning the spring is replaced by something solid, like nail? Otherwise the "extra heavy" spring in here beiter plunger wouldn't be rock hard at the setting she has it on atm.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

julle said:


> Rock hard meaning the spring is replaced by something solid, like nail? Otherwise the "extra heavy" spring in here beiter plunger wouldn't be rock hard at the setting she has it on atm.


I would not know that. The information i got was that the plunger setting was rock hard. This is from someone who received one of her arrows as a gift and it hangs on the wall. He gave me her arrow specs and also said that as an addition. 

Perhaps GT would know. 

Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

Joe T said:


> The only way you can "see" tuning on a video is looking at the physical arrow rotation after it has left the bow or, much less likely, the deviation of the arrow flight path as a consequence of the rotation.







Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Here's what doesn't make any sense to me. Why would any archer use a rock hard plunger? 

Just because it barely depresses, doesn't mean it is rock hard. If you had noticed the oscillation of the shaft on exit, the plunger did depress, but by barely 1mm. The shaft didn't seem to be deflected by a hard plunger, it seems to clear the riser pretty smoothly, suggesting its trajectory wasn't really badly disturbed. It just so happened that in the case of Park's tuning, the shaft oscillated in a manner that did not have the arrow flex more than 1mm at that position during the exit.

There is no mystery. Neither was she using a dead plunger, or anything close to it.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> Here's what doesn't make any sense to me. Why would any archer use a rock hard plunger?
> 
> Just because it barely depresses, doesn't mean it is rock hard. If you had noticed the oscillation of the shaft on exit, the plunger did depress, but by barely 1mm. The shaft didn't seem to be deflected by a hard plunger, it seems to clear the riser pretty smoothly, suggesting its trajectory wasn't really badly disturbed. It just so happened that in the case of Park's tuning, the shaft oscillated in a manner that did not have the arrow flex more than 1mm at that position during the exit.
> 
> There is no mystery. Neither was she using a dead plunger, or anything close to it.


I have to take the word of someone who met her and received her arrow over an observation of a video. I would call that first hand knowledge. He also stated that the arrow was just shy of 26 inches and a easton X10 550 spine arrow. 

Would you refute that too based on the video?

Chris


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I'm a lot more intrigued by the oscillation of the string/nock at the point of release than by a tiny amount of plunger depression. Seems there is about 10X the lateral movement at the point where the string and arrow separate than there is at the plunger.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> I'm a lot more intrigued by the oscillation of the string/nock at the point of release than by a tiny amount of plunger depression. Seems there is about 10X the lateral movement at the point where the string and arrow separate than there is at the plunger.


Me, too. The first thing I noticed was how little oscillation there was of the string - when Park shoots. A LOT more string gyrations going on when I shoot.

Second thing I noticed in this super slowmo was precise is her control over her string fingers, and how the arrow is long gone before there is any visible sign of her back tension pulling her string elbow/hand back and behind.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> I have to take the word of someone who met her and received her arrow over an observation of a video. I would call that first hand knowledge. He also stated that the arrow was just shy of 26 inches and a easton X10 550 spine arrow.
> 
> Would you refute that too based on the video?
> 
> Chris


First hand as in he had a feel of the plunger, or he was told it was "rock hard"? Because that would make it "3rd hand" by the time it was told to you. If he hadn't had a feel of the plunger, yes, I would trust my observation of the video.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Actually Larry, that's true of most archers, even when they have sloppy looking releases and follow-through's. Following the '04 trials, we had a young lady set up a slow motion camera and used Dartfish software to prepare a series of videos for us to review our shots. As crappy as my release looked in real-time, Frank and I both noticed that all things were good until long after the arrow was well clear of the bow. I just had never polished a nice follow-through like most folks were taught. So, no worries if your follow-through isn't textbook. And my guess is if you did get good slow motion video of yourself, you'd find that the arrow was well clear of the bow before you started to move your string hand, as well.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

lksseven said:


> .....and how the arrow is long gone before there is any visible sign of her back tension pulling her string elbow/hand back and behind.


Most archers' slo-mo videos would be similar.


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

chrstphr said:


> I have to take the word of someone who met her and received her arrow over an observation of a video. I would call that first hand knowledge. He also stated that the arrow was just shy of 26 inches and a easton X10 550 spine arrow.
> 
> Would you refute that too based on the video?
> 
> Chris


Interesting, the Easton shaft selector puts a 26" x10 550 at the 53-57# weight area. Did she pull that much? Or does her clean release allow her to go a spine stiffer?


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> He's talking about "rotation" of the arrow around the axis of the riser, not rotation of the arrow itself. Completely different things.


I see thanks for the clarification that was not at all clear for me from the posts that he has made. Clearly an issue with my interpretation of his language so what he's talking about is flexing around the axis of the bow and the subsequent speed at which the arrow recovers is an indication of proper tuning? If that's it then I totally agree!

When we talk about rotation I instantly think of the arrows spin rate, which has some value but not nearly as relevant to the bow tuning exercise.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

kshet26 said:


> Interesting, the Easton shaft selector puts a 26" x10 550 at the 53-57# weight area. Did she pull that much? Or does her clean release allow her to go a spine stiffer?


clean release. She is shooting about 3 spines stiffer. She was shooting #44 lbs.


Chris


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> First hand as in he had a feel of the plunger, or he was told it was "rock hard"? Because that would make it "3rd hand" by the time it was told to you. If he hadn't had a feel of the plunger, yes, I would trust my observation of the video.


i do not know the specifics, but SHE gave him an arrow. That would put it first hand. Perhaps she TOLD him it was rock hard. Perhaps he felt it while looking at her bow and talking with her. How else would he even reference that detail. 

This deviation of the thread is pointless. 

Chris


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> Actually Larry, that's true of most archers, even when they have sloppy looking releases and follow-through's. Following the '04 trials, we had a young lady set up a slow motion camera and used Dartfish software to prepare a series of videos for us to review our shots. As crappy as my release looked in real-time, Frank and I both noticed that all things were good until long after the arrow was well clear of the bow. I just had never polished a nice follow-through like most folks were taught. So, no worries if your follow-through isn't textbook. *And my guess is if you did get good slow motion video of yourself, you'd find that the arrow was well clear of the bow before you started to move your string hand, as well.*


I sure hope you're right! If so, then I'll have to look elsewhere for the reasons/differences in her 70meter scores and my own


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

limbwalker said:


> I'm a lot more intrigued by the oscillation of the string/nock at the point of release than by a tiny amount of plunger depression. Seems there is about 10X the lateral movement at the point where the string and arrow separate than there is at the plunger.


After thr discussion on this thread, I thought this is what the plunger accounts for, within reason.

Also seems like brace height should come into play here. Assuming a perfectly consistent release, an archer should be able to dial in a brace height where the nock separates from the string as close to "zero" as possible. The plunger then helps with the rest.

Or maybe I'm still not grocking the content of this thread.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

gjlama94 said:


> After thr discussion on this thread, I thought this is what the plunger accounts for, within reason.
> 
> Also seems like brace height should come into play here. *Assuming a perfectly consistent release*, an archer should be able to dial in a brace height where the nock separates from the string as close to "zero" as possible. The plunger then helps with the rest.
> 
> Or maybe I'm still not grocking the content of this thread.


And there's the rub. But more than just a consistent release (although that is probably the most that mere mortals can aspire to), what catches my eye/imagination here in this video is the silk-smooth cleanness of her release that results in such a calm string after release . You can theoretically time the brace height/nock release from the string to point 'zero', but coming from what angle (If perfect is zero angle, and a total pluck is 90degree angle)? Her release would seem to make finding 'zero' a lot easier than a heavy, stiff fingered mauling of the string at release.


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

lksseven said:


> And there's the rub. But more than just a consistent release (although that is probably the most that mere mortals can aspire to), what catches my eye/imagination here in this video is the silk-smooth cleanness of her release that results in such a calm string after release . You can theoretically time the brace height/nock release from the string to point 'zero', but coming from what angle (If perfect is zero angle, and a total pluck is 90degree angle)? Her release would seem to make finding 'zero' a lot easier than a heavy, stiff fingered mauling of the string at release.


I think "zero" would be where the string is prior to drawing- or the center of the bow for most archers. The worse the pluck, the further from that ideal the arrow separated from the string at.

As far as finding "zero", seems like that comes back to consistency.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

b0w_bender said:


> I see thanks for the clarification that was not at all clear for me from the posts that he has made. Clearly an issue with my interpretation of his language so what he's talking about is flexing around the axis of the bow and the subsequent speed at which the arrow recovers is an indication of proper tuning? If that's it then I totally agree!
> 
> When we talk about rotation I instantly think of the arrows spin rate, which has some value but not nearly as relevant to the bow tuning exercise.


Seemed to have confused everybody here  . By rotation I mean the rotation of the arrow around an axis perpendicular to the the arrow shaft. Think of an arrow shaft spinning on an axle going through the shaft at 90 degrees.. So it's not spin as in spin wing and nothing to do with the arrow flexing. The simplest way to detect and measure the direction and rate of rotation of an arrow shaft is to shoot the arrow through a sheet of paper at close range. The width of the tear indicates the rate of rotation, you can see the plane of rotation and because you can differentiate between the point and the nock you can determine the direction of rotation. This of course is the basis of the paper tuning method which works fine except that it's nowhere near as accurate as a bare shaft tune.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> I'm a lot more intrigued by the oscillation of the string/nock at the point of release than by a tiny amount of plunger depression. Seems there is about 10X the lateral movement at the point where the string and arrow separate than there is at the plunger.


Sorry John I don't understand what you referring to, do you mean the amount the nock moves sideways after separating from the string - just curious.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I mean the extreme side-to-side movement of the nock at or around the point it separates from the string, as compared to the very limited side-to-side movement of the point end of the arrow at the plunger.


----------



## kshet26 (Dec 20, 2010)

Maybe something to do with the rock hard plunger?


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

i would hazard a guess that its the stiffer spine and clean release with less deflection. 

I would imagine a weaker spine would bend the arrow more overall, while the stiffer spine would resist and only flex the back end.


Chris


----------



## JMM (Jan 26, 2009)

The Button in Parks Bow is not rock hard. I have this Bow in my Hands in Leipzig. It was the hard Spring (the golden Spring) in the Button. The Button stand near Position 8.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> I mean the extreme side-to-side movement of the nock at or around the point it separates from the string, as compared to the very limited side-to-side movement of the point end of the arrow at the plunger.


Well thanks, but the arrow behaviour looks perfectly normal to me <shrug>


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

kshet26 said:


> Interesting, the Easton shaft selector puts a 26" x10 550 at the 53-57# weight area. Did she pull that much? Or does her clean release allow her to go a spine stiffer?


My daughter was shooting 620 ACEs at 42" and 26", so nothing strange that at 44# you have to go to 550 X10 ... 
In these days she is shooting ACE's 850 at 36#, and she has shot 720 at 38# and 670 at 40#... Then you have to add bow efficiency, different points and so on ... but Parks' arrows to me look very correct in spine. 

More and more in these days I find all these arrow selectors around making confusion only. I have one on my phone that I use for reference (catalog) of all shafts available, but that gives right arrow selction in one case over 10... 

May be is time to start a public database of real arrows to make things more ... real .. but I'm out of topic now...


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

In the original Beiter "Way to The Centre" HS videos there was of video of a badly matched arrow being shot. Don't think the video is one of the publicly available ones but I've attached a few screen captures which indicate that the arrow was rotating a high speed coming out of the bow.

https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/3Jj3HsJ6vO4VCieln67HHGcDVlO8Y2T3v7bh4PHFYxg=w208-h207-p-no

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/aScub5KP3hv35du8yVPEJbRsuE5b7ytJ8yEIDI9rooU=w206-h207-p-no

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/iO6TMmbmLmTko04OG1aqciymHXwU7jr9qm1H3A291Rc=w210-h207-p-no

https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/MinVqBOMaVheEWQnhof1s8E6KWH0wW9sprH4MAn7e48=w190-h207-p-no


----------



## ThomVis (Feb 21, 2012)

gjlama94 said:


> Funny. I made the exact same observation in a previous thread which referenced this video. I was subsequently told "that arrow is perfectly tuned for that bow. You can tell because the fletchings oscillate away from the riser as they pass by." Can't find the thread, so the quote is from memory, but it's accurate enough (the quote I mean).
> 
> I don't know enough about this stuff to be able to refute or contest such a claim, though it seemed plausible.


Your quote is accurate, I made that remark. I looked at the the timing of the oscillation of the arrow and concluded is was correct. I didn't know it was possible to tune a too-weak arrow to oscillate the same way a good spined arrow would. Is it?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Joe T said:


> Well thanks, but the arrow behaviour looks perfectly normal to me <shrug>


What I'm saying is that the nock end of the arrow is moving back and forth about an inch, and we're obsessing over a 1 mm movement of the plunger?


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

limbwalker said:


> What I'm saying is that the nock end of the arrow is moving back and forth about an inch, and we're obsessing over a 1 mm movement of the plunger?


What _else_ do we have to do?


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

limbwalker said:


> What I'm saying is that the nock end of the arrow is moving back and forth about an inch, and we're obsessing over a 1 mm movement of the plunger?


Ah right! The nock has to move a good distance sideways else the fletchings would never get past the riser. Whereas even though plunger movement is only of minor importance you don't want too much of it (less than 2mm say).


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

lksseven said:


> What _else_ do we have to do?


Flame each other over draw weight?


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> i do not know the specifics, but SHE gave him an arrow. That would put it first hand. Perhaps she TOLD him it was rock hard. Perhaps he felt it while looking at her bow and talking with her. How else would he even reference that detail.
> 
> This deviation of the thread is pointless.
> 
> Chris


Your explanation has been noted. I apologise for deviating from the topic, which has to do with tuning the plunger.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

Joe T said:


> Seemed to have confused everybody here  . By rotation I mean the rotation of the arrow around an axis perpendicular to the the arrow shaft. Think of an arrow shaft spinning on an axle going through the shaft at 90 degrees.. So it's not spin as in spin wing and nothing to do with the arrow flexing. The simplest way to detect and measure the direction and rate of rotation of an arrow shaft is to shoot the arrow through a sheet of paper at close range. The width of the tear indicates the rate of rotation, you can see the plane of rotation and because you can differentiate between the point and the nock you can determine the direction of rotation. This of course is the basis of the paper tuning method which works fine except that it's nowhere near as accurate as a bare shaft tune.


Sorry Joe you made it worse I have read your response 5 times and I don't see any rotation, particularly when you say "it has nothing to do with the flexing"? 
Paper shows the angle the arrow has as it penetrates the paper and I agree with your opinion on it's accuracy particularly with finger shooting. I would go so far as to say it has nearly zero value to a recurve shooter. You should start and probably end with bare shaft tuning. 

Here is my explanation of how an arrow leaves a bow and how the cushion plunger interacts:
As the string wraps around your release fingers it is deflected out away from the plane of the bow by you fingers. The recovery of this deflection as well as the extreme pressure being applied to the back of the arrow causes the center of the arrow to flex out away from the bow. The cushion plunger absorbs some of that flex and to a very minor extent pushes the front of the arrow out away from the riser. The arrow leaves the bow oscillating back and forth along a relatively straight line out a very small distance from the face of the riser. 

If the arrow is too stiff the deflection is not absorbed by flex and the arrow is cast out of the bow sideways. to weak and the flex can cause the arrow to break or over flex and again leave the bow sideways in the opposite direction of the stiff arrow. So proper spine and tune is the Goldylocks zone we all strive for.

My definition of a rotation is an object moving around a center point on an arc. As far as I can tell an arrow is not moving around a center point on an arc. My observations is that a well tuned arrow moves along a line flexing back and forth as it goes. The quicker it stops oscillating the better. I come to this understanding through personal experience testing and watching videos like the ones posted above. To be honest with you I don't think we have a disagreement it's just different definitions and nomenclature.


----------



## Ar-Pe-Lo (Oct 16, 2011)

chrstphr said:


> clean release. She is shooting about 3 spines stiffer. She was shooting #44 lbs.
> 
> 
> Chris


It's interesting for me....as i have "very far from clean" release and shooting 3 spines stiffer arrows (X-10 450, 28", 45#)


Anyway ......I think "release" is very much overrated as it's most visible part of shot - bow arm is much more important IMO


----------



## gjlama94 (Oct 11, 2013)

b0w_bender said:


> Sorry Joe you made it worse I have read your response 5 times and I don't see any rotation, particularly when you say "it has nothing to do with the flexing"?
> Paper shows the angle the arrow has as it penetrates the paper and I agree with your opinion on it's accuracy particularly with finger shooting. I would go so far as to say it has nearly zero value to a recurve shooter. You should start and probably end with bare shaft tuning.
> 
> Here is my explanation of how an arrow leaves a bow and how the cushion plunger interacts:
> ...


What Joe refers to as "rotation" I believe is more commonly called "fishtailing", if I understand him correctly.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

I think you may be right but he clearly has a lot to add to the conversation so that's why I keep trying to clarify because I'm not sure we're getting a clear picture of what he is saying.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Ar-Pe-Lo said:


> It's interesting for me....as i have "very far from clean" release and shooting 3 spines stiffer arrows (X-10 450, 28", 45#)
> 
> 
> Anyway ......I think "release" is very much overrated as it's most visible part of shot - bow arm is much more important IMO



In the words of that legendary Texan, Hank Hill.... 

"Yup."


----------



## straat (Jan 22, 2009)

If the arrow is pointing to the right of the centerline coming out if the bow and pointing left when it reaches the target, it has rotated.


----------



## Jim18655 (Sep 17, 2011)

Here's a question for you. You've done the walk-back tuning, tuned for groups and now the walk-back tuning shows the plunger pressure to to be off one way or the other. What's the best solution?


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> i would hazard a guess that its the stiffer spine and clean release with less deflection.
> 
> I would imagine a weaker spine would bend the arrow more overall, while the stiffer spine would resist and only flex the back end.
> 
> ...


Hi Chris

What would you say is a clean release vs a sloppy release?

Steve


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

TargetOz said:


> Hi Chris
> 
> What would you say is a clean release vs a sloppy release?
> 
> Steve


I would say a clean release has less deflection and a sloppier release will have more deflection of the arrow. 

in real time i dont think you would be able to see much of a difference between the two. 

Chris


----------



## TargetOz (Jan 16, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> I would say a clean release has less deflection and a sloppier release will have more deflection of the arrow.
> 
> in real time i dont think you would be able to see much of a difference between the two.
> 
> Chris


Thanks Chris


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

straat said:


> If the arrow is pointing to the right of the centerline coming out if the bow and pointing left when it reaches the target, it has rotated.


Ah an epiphany!

OK sorry Joe, I think I understand it was a problem with my paradigm what you are saying it's a bit of an oversimplification of what the arrow is doing but clearly the root or the basics of what is happening I think I understand what you were saying now.
If the arrow ends are rotating relative to the center point of the arrow then it would not be tuned
If it is just flexing and not rotating it is tuned. If that's what you meant I definitely agree with that and I'm one thick headed doofus for missing what you were saying.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Bowbender, the other way to say what Joe is saying is if the nodes (the points on the arrow that don't move when the arrow flexes) are traveling toward the target, it's tuned. If they are traveling to the left of the target (for a RH archer) then the arrow is "rotating" counterclockwise and is weak, and if the nodes are traveling to the right of the target line, the arrow is "rotating" clockwise and the arrow is stiff.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Bowbender, the other way to say what Joe is saying is if the nodes (the points on the arrow that don't move when the arrow flexes) are traveling toward the target, it's tuned. If they are traveling to the left of the target (for a RH archer) then the arrow is "rotating" counterclockwise and is weak, and if the nodes are traveling to the right of the target line, the arrow is "rotating" clockwise and the arrow is stiff.


Yup got it


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

gjlama94 said:


> Flame each other over draw weight?


Exactly! :icon_1_lol:


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

gjlama94 said:


> What Joe refers to as "rotation" I believe is more commonly called "fishtailing", if I understand him correctly.


Now why didn't I think of saying that? yeah fishtailing/porpoising is what I mean. If you move the nock up and down it changes the porpoising of the arrow. If you change the button spring tension it changes the fishtailing of the arrow. If the arrow comes out of the bow rotating (shaft at an angle to the air flow) then drag pushes the arrow sideways. By bow set up and tuning you are adjusting the arrow rota...er fishtailing to minimize the effect of this sideways acting drag. Whether or not or how the arrow is vibrating doesn't directly matter.

What really causes confusion are the words weak or stiff as there's a dual meaning. Right at the top of this thread there's a list of how make an arrow act weaker or act stiffer. Problem it this list is a bit of a mess as it mixes up several different definitions of "weak" and "stiff".

Sometimes weak/stiff relates the physical stiffness of the shaft (its EI value) this is the bendability of the shaft, its Spine as defined by Easton, GNAS or whoever.
Sometimes weak/stiff relate to the direction of flight. For a RH archer if the arrow swings left it's stiff and if it swings to the right it's weak.
Sometimes weak/stiff relate to the free-free vibration frequency of the shaft (this ties in with the Archers Paradox bending of the arrow and arrow selection). The higher the frequency the stiffer the shaft.

These definitions sometimes conflict with each other. If say you add more weight to the point or nock you lower the vibration frequency so with the frequency definition in both cases you make the arrow weaker. On the other hand with the direction of flight definition adding weight to the point makes the arrow weaker but adding weight to the nock makes the arrow stiffer.


----------



## mariezku (Oct 13, 2003)

Wow! Great info here. Need to read carefully this post! Thank you


----------

