# Best limb discussions. A waste of time?



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

The arguments about which limbs are "best" will never go away and here is why.

They are all identical in function. 
They are virtually identical in look.
They are similar in performance. 

Now, consider this also.
There are different risers, different limb lengths and different poundages in each length. 

Not complicated enough for you?

There are different body shapes, strengths, styles and perceptions. You'll need to factor all this as well if you actually want to test something.
Oh, don't forget different brace heights, string materials and strand variations.

Even if you could get every limb in the world, how would you test them?
What information would mean anything?
How would you know what was important enough to make an "educated" choice on?

Discussing which is the best limb is like discussing which is the best colour, best icecream flavour or best pizza topping. 

If there WAS a best limb and it was easy to find, every top shooter would shoot it. 

Accept that there is no best limb for everyone, but there is a best limb for you. 

The only person who can tell you that is yourself. After all, it's you that picked your favourite colour, icecream and pizza, wasn't it?

Would you go onto a Pizza forum and ask which is the best topping?
Would you know how to argue which President has been the best?

Asking for opinions is just that. 
Nobody has the same standards that they form their opinions by. 

The only way that you personally can know which limb is the best for you is to go and buy them all so that your mind is at ease. 
Then see which one you prefer for your own reasons. 
Then you will have the best set of limbs for you. 

Anyone who tells you any other method is wrong. Trying them all is the only way to make up your own mind. 

Too expensive and time consuming for you? Gee, that's a pity. You'll have to compromise. 

But don't worry. There's not enough difference in them to affect your performance on the shooting line.

Because this is the age of the Internet and if there WAS something that was significantly better than the others, the information would be well known and there would be enough proof to convince everyone. 

The best archers are the best archers regardless of what limb they're shooting.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Limbs are mechanical devices with objectively measurable properties. Certain properties, like the force draw curve and limb efficiency are simple and can give the archer an idea if the limbs are of the type they know they like.

Clearly limb choice is subjective, but some of the performance data is objective. While other people's opinions about how much they like certain limbs are subjective, if you can get enough opinions from different people--and the reasons behind their opinions--you can get a rough idea about whether the limb is a type you might like, such as a linear force draw curve, one that doesn't stack at your draw length. Or you might want a really efficient limb, linear FD curve be damned.

Think of your food analogy. We can and do rate and review food even though food preference is subjective. One opinion on a restaurant may not be significant, but 10 reviews by people who's tastes and preferences you know could be quite helpful. And they can give details about why the did or didn't like the food. If they say the food is really salty and you really dislike like salty food, that could give you an idea that you may well dislike the food the restaurant serves.

Yes, ultimately one has to try and decide for oneself, but "best of threads" are not "pick my limbs for me" threads, they are seeking opinions, and the opinions may well be that all the top limbs are the same. But how is one to know this without asking, especially since most of us will never get a chance to try all the top brands?

So, yes, limbs are subjective; no, there is no magic limb that will make ordinary archers into great ones; but, there is some value to seeking opinions on line, as long as we recognize them for being just that, opinions. And you believe in the value of opinions, or you would have kept yours to yourself, so the very existence of this thread is your testament to your belief in the value of opinions.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Warbow said:


> Limbs are mechanical devices with objectively measurable properties. Certain properties, like the force draw curve and limb efficiency are simple and can give the archer an idea if the limbs are of the type they know they like.


Which would be good if we could be sure that the archer knows what they like. If they knew what they liked, they would likely go and buy what they liked because they'd know what it was. 

How can we be sure that force draw curve and efficiency figures are correct. Limb differences are so minimal that calibration errors in testing equipment will obscure them.

You're also assuming that efficiency of limbs actually means something to the performance of the archer. 



Warbow said:


> Clearly limb choice is subjective, but some of the performance data is objective.


But unless you test them all objectively, you have no idea how they compare. 
And you have no idea if two sets of limbs of the same model will be as close together in performance characteristics unless you can give an idea of statistical deviation. 
Nobody does that, so the stated figures are devalued.




Warbow said:


> Think of your food analogy. We can and do rate and review food even though food preference is subjective. One opinion on a restaurant may not be significant, but 10 reviews by people who's tastes and preferences you know could be quite helpful. And they can give details about why the did or didn't like the food. If they say the food is really salty and you really dislike like salty food, that could give you an idea that you may well dislike the food the restaurant serves.


I know of nobody who chooses their restaurants based only on other people's recommendations. 

Knowing someone else's preferences is only relevant if you can compare them to your own. If you have no idea what you like, does it matter who you ask or what restaurant you go to?



Warbow said:


> Yes, ultimately one has to try and decide for oneself, but "best of threads" are not "pick my limbs for me" threads, they are seeking opinions, and the opinions may well be that all the top limbs are the same. But how is one to know this without asking, especially since most of us will never get a chance to try all the top brands?
> 
> So, yes, limbs are subjective; no, there is no magic limb that will make ordinary archers into great ones; but, there is some value to seeking opinions on line, as long as we recognize them for being just that, opinions. And you believe in the value of opinions, or you would have kept yours to yourself, so the very existence of this thread is your testament to your belief in the value of opinions.


The value of opinions is undermined by the qualitative value of them. 
Would you rather have opinion or fact?

And why is it that there are so few hard and fast facts about limbs?
(Other than that it is almost impossible to collect for the value that it would be)
My opinion is that opinions should be judged on what information they give and what they don't.


----------



## Hank D Thoreau (Dec 9, 2008)

I was a research chemist in the late 70's doing applied research in the cure and control of graphite epoxy compsites and prepregs--referred to in Archery as: carbon (graphite in golf). I can tell you for a fact that you can see significant variations in the mechanical properties of these materials depending on the state of the starting materials and the cure cycles used to make them -- and the cure cycles are dependent on the state of the starting materials. This is a chemical process that can be slapped together to make low cost limbs or meticulously controlled to create high end limbs. The more controls in place, the less variability in the end product and the higher the cost. I am sure the same applies to glass/resin and foam cores. Ever wonder where "high modulus foam" comes from and how a foam can be manufactured with high stress strain characteristics?

The problem with the discussions that have been going on over "best" is that the question has not been properly and completely stated so that a satisfactory answer or opinions can be provided. Depending on how the question is stated, either of you can be correct. Clearly limbs have objective properties that can be measured and correlated to performance; and just as clearly it is up to the feel of the individual to determine limb preferrence. For me, I'll take the blue one -- no, the red one.


----------



## bduplin (Jun 5, 2008)

BUT...a list of the BEST 5 Limbs is very helpful.


----------



## Jason22 (Aug 16, 2008)

whiz-Oz said:


> ...why is it that there are so few hard and fast facts about limbs?


Because they are basically just a spring and they all do the same thing.

The materials have different properties, and costs but honestly - if there was one material or method of construction or brand or model that was so much better than all others, we'd have figured it out by now and everyone would be using the same thing. We can probably all agree that carbon is a very good limb material.

If you have a very long draw, you might want to ask around or try limbs before buying them because you could be pulling several pounds above the limbs markings. Some limbs do this (stack) more than others.

If you're trying to reach a certain distance but can only shoot ___# limbs, you would want fast limbs and/or light arrows. Some limbs are faster than others, even if it's only by 3-5fps that could be enough to get you to the distance you need. It could also mean shooting 1-2# less to reach the same distance.

Some people may live in areas where there are great temperature changes so they may benefit from limbs constructed to address this. 

If you're like most people with a draw not too many inches off of 28" and are able to shoot the poundage you need to reach the distances in your division, then any of the limbs will work fine and you can adjust your riser to dial in poundage.

Just like buying a vehicle, musical instrument or jacket: There are models that address different needs. Once that is considered, personal preference or brand loyalty is usually the deciding factor and Olympic athletes have proven you can shoot any brand of limb at be competitive at the world level.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

Whiz, when are you going to get over this concept that people can't test things objectively. Just because you can't doesn't mean other are incapible also.

It is rumored the Park Sung Hung shot 12 different pairs of Masters limbs testing for score. The worst pair was incapible of even shooting 1200. With the best pair she shot her 1405 world record.

Testing limbs statically is nearly worthless. Testing different limbs dynamically, especially the same poundage and make is quite simple. I had two pairs of PSE Xpressions that were virtually identical in all the static measurements, yet one pair consistantly shot 3 points higher on average on a 36 arrow 70m game over a couple of months that I tested them.

There are massive differences in limbs even of the same make and model. There are also massive differences between brands.

Come on dude, get with it  All this negative talk about how every thing is all good and it's only the pilot, is a bunch of crap. Everyone knows it's all about the equipment  :shade: 

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Darn you, 3hammer, for throwing another factor into the mix!

I hadn't really thought much about variability. Without thinking about it I had just assumed that high end limbs had very low variability, and I imagine that generally speaking they do. But, indeed, as with any other product, the opinions we hear may well be based on exceptionally good or exceptionally bad individual units. But that is true of any subjective impressions with any product that can have variability, which is why one seeks out as wide a range of opinions as possible to get a better average.

But, you bring up something I'd rather wasn't possible, which is that someone can buy an expensive limb and get a dud. We know that can and does happen with arrows, which is why Vittorio noted that the stuff sponsored shooters get is not necessarily ordinary stock, but hand selected. And it is why archers have to test all their arrows and narrow down the good from the not as good. It would be even more logistically difficult or expensive to try and do that with limbs.

Well, my next limbs aren't going to be in the high end category, so I won't worry about such things too much. I hope I get lucky with my limbs though


----------



## Custard (Feb 23, 2007)

> Best limb discussions. A waste of time?


Yes, I believe it is. For all the reasons that have been mentioned by Whiz, and because of the problem that even if an individual could evaluate limbs meaningfully, they would have to shoot the various contenders on the same day. Humans have a notoriously bad habit of being swayed by moods, so on a good day, shooting well, the limbs will be good, and vice versa. Also people are vastly influenced by preconceptions such as “wow these really feel fast” because they have been hyped up by the advertising, when they are, in fact, almost identical to the previous model.
If you are consistent enough to shoot a round and be within a couple of points each time, then I would take notice, otherwise forget it, your inconsistency is more than any limb.



> It is rumored the Park Sung Hung shot 12 different pairs of Masters limbs testing for score. The worst pair was incapible of even shooting 1200. With the best pair she shot her 1405 world record.


Not calling anyone a Hans Christian Anderson here but I would like to know the source of this before I gave it very much credence.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Custard said:


> y. Humans have a notoriously bad habit of being swayed by moods, so on a good day, shooting well, the limbs will be good, and vice versa. Also people are vastly influenced by preconceptions such as “wow these really feel fast” because they have been hyped up by the advertising, when they are, in fact, almost identical to the previous model.


It it quite true that human perception is suggestible and falible, especially regarding things that are on the edge of detectability. That is why claims that one kind of speaker cable being better than another should be taken with a grain of salt--and it is why we have _science_, a method of studying the world that works to account for human biases, and it is why I have consistently asked for **data** like force draw curves. Science is a method of separating what is true from what seems to be true.

But, just because something is difficult to determine, such as whether one kind of limb is objectively better than another in some manner, doesn't mean we shouldn't try to do so. 

And if opinion and data are so useless, we might as well close this whole forum, because that is all it is. I don't think we should close the forum. Do you?


----------



## Custard (Feb 23, 2007)

> objectively better than another in some manner


And that raises the big question, in what manner?
Is stability better than speed? Is less stacking more beneficial to you that torsional rigidity? 
It is possible to measure all the above, and objective data would then be available. So if you ask for the fastest you could consult the data (as long as you had it for all draw lengths, weights, and arrow combinations) and you could get a definitive answer. 
This goes for all the other measurable/quantifiable parameters. It does not tell you the “best”.
If I could choose any limbs, no expense spared, I would probably choose a pair of Borders (brand loyalty) and choose the most expensive as they are generally the latest, and most developed. Oh, and in a custom colour. 

I don’t think opinion and data is useless, it is interesting, so keep the forum open.
I still think it is a waste of time discussing best, but arguing this point is also a waste of time. In fact, come to think of it, asking the original question is a waste of time also because as he says in the first line “The arguments about which limbs are "best" will never go away”.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

*Placebo*

c3hammer, I'm curious, When you and or Park were testing the limbs were you doing so without knowledge of what limbs were on the bow. I can't help but think if you felt the limbs were inferior they would perform in an inferior fashion. Not necessarily because the limbs were inferior but because you felt they were. So unless you were testing in a blind scenario then you were not being objective. Put those same limbs on a shooting machine and lets compare the scores they may or may not be inferior. To test objectively you need to remove all human intervention (variability) when testing objectively. The placebo affect is well documented and confidence in ones equipment is unquestionably a factor in and archers ability to hit the target. 

Now if testing 5 different types of limbs is what it takes to make you have confidence in your equipment then by all means have at it. Obviously in order for an archer to post their best scores they must have complete confidence in their equipment and their abilities.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

C3hammer was mentioning a well known problem at top level. Not all pairs of limbs are made equal, nor they all perform the same way. But, this is in no way a matter for amateur archers , but for very top level pros only. 
Yes, some (pair of) limbs do not perform same as other, even when made at the same time. But no machine will be able to find out the problems, as no machine can simulate the variability of the release of a pro archer and his knowlege of the maximum mistake that specific release can give to that specific arrow in that specific condition. Only top level archers can. An this is the darker sight of the nightmares of limbs manufacturers, as they get plenty of limbs rejected from their top archers, because of this.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> And that raises the big question, in what manner?
> Is stability better than speed? Is less stacking more beneficial to you that torsional rigidity?


Oh just shoot me now...

ukey:

John.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> Oh just shoot me now...
> 
> ukey:
> 
> John.


If you love this you'd **really** love those audiophile forums where they debate which AC cords "sound better"--yes, AC cords, the ones that plug into the wall and the amp.

But, I think we've had an interesting range of opinions here, ranging from, all limbs are essentially the same at the top to top limbs even in a single make and model vary so much that top archers have to test them for themselves.

Does the truth lie somewhere in between? Is everybody right at the same time somehow? 

Well, I don't know. I still think it is an interesting question. And I'm glad my next limbs aren't going to be in this expensive category so I don't have to think about it too much


----------



## Jason22 (Aug 16, 2008)

An archer I know was working for Hoyt when a sponsored shooter returned several pairs of limbs, saying they were defective. The archer I know took at set of them and started using them as his personal set. A few weeks later the gentleman beat the sponsored archer at a tournament. The archer yet again blamed their limbs for their poor performance saying that Hoyt didn't make a decent set and the guy who outshot him must have hand picked his set of limbs or something to that effect. When he was informed the limbs that were used to beat him were one of the sets that he had returned as "defective", he got a fat serving of humble pie.

Sometimes it is in the gear, but usually it's in the gears between your ears.


----------



## Archerone (Mar 30, 2006)

Vittorio said:


> C3hammer was mentioning a well known problem at top level. Not all pairs of limbs are made equal, nor they all perform the same way. But, this is in no way a matter for amateur archers , but for very top level pros only.
> Yes, some (pair of) limbs do not perform same as other, even when made at the same time. But no machine will be able to find out the problems, as no machine can simulate the variability of the release of a pro archer and his knowlege of the maximum mistake that specific release can give to that specific arrow in that specific condition. Only top level archers can. An this is the darker sight of the nightmares of limbs manufacturers, as they get plenty of limbs rejected from their top archers, because of this.


When my daughter was shooting the compound we were sent a new bow. I set it up and got it to tune real well. I asked for another bow as a backup. It was awful, nothing I did would get it to come close to the most basic tuning. I argued with tech support over it until they took it back. They replaced the limbs and all was well.
When my daughter changed over to recurve we started to get limbs that had problems. It got to the point that the manufacturer stopped production until the problem was fixed. Those limbs ruined her confidence for a long time. The limbs would twist and become unstrung coming to full draw. They did not do that until shot for a while. Had to pull out of the National Indoor when it started. The archers in the lane next to her were affected also.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Jason22 said:


> An archer I know was working for Hoyt when a sponsored shooter returned several pairs of limbs, saying they were defective. The archer I know took at set of them and started using them as his personal set. A few weeks later the gentleman beat the sponsored archer at a tournament. The archer yet again blamed their limbs for their poor performance saying that Hoyt didn't make a decent set and the guy who outshot him must have hand picked his set of limbs or something to that effect. When he was informed the limbs that were used to beat him were one of the sets that he had returned as "defective", he got a fat serving of humble pie.
> 
> Sometimes it is in the gear, but usually it's in the gears between your ears.


Interesting, and certainly possible. But, on the other hand, it is also possible that what worked well for one might legitimately not have worked well for another. Science, and the scientific method, is the way to investigate such questions. But to do so, on would have to come up with a way of double blind testing the limbs so the archers wouldn't know what make, model or individual unit they were testing. That would be tough, I think.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Are these kinds of discussions a waste of time? 

Heaven's No!

Equipment plays a roll in an archer's ability to score points...and discussing what top archers use or the characteristics they look for in equipment choices...are valuable!

What an archer shouldn't do is obsess over it...to the point they make excuses for their poor performance or the performance of an opponent based on equipment choices.

There's a reson why archers are seperated into different classes and there's a reason why top archers are picky about their equipment choices.

Is equipment going to make an average archer a world class archer?

No...but choosing equipment that decreases the effect of human error can increase an archer's overall score. Tournaments can be won or lossed by just a matter of a few points...but the majority of the points are made through good practice, perceverence, good coaching and hard work.

Ray


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> Does the truth lie somewhere in between?


No, the truth is that if you aren't a 1300+ shooter already, your time is better spent on other things because you will never notice the difference in the first place.

I believe there are two types of archers. Those who focus more on their equipment and those who focus more on themselves...

John.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> No, the truth is that if you aren't a 1300+ shooter already, your time is better spent on other things because you will never notice the difference in the first place.
> 
> I believe there are two types of archers. Those who focus more on their equipment and those who focus more on themselves...
> 
> John.


Well, I hope so. I'm hoping I like the limbs I just bought on blind faith from Alt Services since there are no local dealers here who cary more than a token ILF limb or two in the area.


----------



## omega_archer (Aug 25, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> No, the truth is that if you aren't a 1300+ shooter already, your time is better spent on other things because you will never notice the difference in the first place.
> 
> I believe there are two types of archers. Those who focus more on their equipment and those who focus more on themselves...
> 
> John.


John, I just want to say that having access to people like yourself who have competed or coached at the top level is what makes this forum so valuable. I belong to the "gear-geek" club and am an engineer so you have to believe me when I say it's killing me to shoot my 15 year old Hoyt Radian when there are all those cool new risers and limbs floating around. But...I for one take and use a lot of the advice I read here and go and practice as much as I can with my old equipment because it will out shoot me for a long time. I think it's safe to say that modern recurve equipment will put the arrow where ever you tell it to go. And you know what they say garbage in - garbage out.

Maybe the best limbs are simply the ones that you shoot 500x a week.


----------



## DariusXV (Feb 18, 2009)

I don't think seeking out answers is a waste of time at all. Especially if you are a beginning archer and would like to try and make an informed decision for yourself.

Granted, not all answers and opinions will work for you, but it's nice to at least have a venue to discuss some concerns.

It's too expensive a sport to just "wing" everything.

The dismissive nature and caustic replies of certain individuals with regards to the validity of such research tells more than you might think.

Almost everything in life requires, at some point, deep study and then the ability afterward to "let it go and just BE."

So...ask away! Read away! And then...BE!


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

Vittorio said:


> no machine will be able to find out the problems, as no machine can simulate the variability of the release of a pro archer and his knowlege of the maximum mistake that specific release can give to that specific arrow in that specific condition. Only top level archers can.


Isn't this then measuring the variability of the archer and not the limb?

I believe you actually could build in some variability in the release mechanism I've thought about doing it for a long time to test this very thing, forgiveness of a limb. Clearly the deflection of the string on release must have a variable. there is no reason why you couldn't add a device that caused deflection of the string and then measure from limb to limb the variance in the arrow strikes. That would be an objective measurment of the limb. Measuring the feelings of a top archer is absolutely subjective and anecdotal. 

I'm really enjoying this string it is very entertaining.

I know this is a little redundant, the best limbs are the ones you believe are the best. This has nothing to do with the performance of the limbs it has to do with the performance of the archer. I fully believe that there are probably a very small number of limbs out there that don't bend the same way every time you pull them back. But the vast majority of them will outperform 99% of all archers (probably 100%)

Yes the limbs you practice 500 arrows a day with will outperform the ones you spend 10 arrows a day with. Archery is a game of luck, the more you practice the luckier you get. 

:set1_applaud:


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

b0w_bender said:


> Isn't this then measuring the variability of the archer and not the limb?
> 
> I'm really enjoying this string it is very entertaining.
> 
> I know this is a little redundant, the best limbs are the ones you believe are the best. This has nothing to do with the performance of the limbs it has to do with the performance of the archer. I fully believe that there are probably a very small number of limbs out there that don't bend the same way every time you pull them back. But the vast majority of them will outperform 99% of all archers (probably 100%)


It is true that people are very prone to subjective validation. That is why science uses double blind tests to control for such things when testing subjective impressions. So, a proper "scientific" limb test would have to be double blind, if that is possible.

But, there is a mistake, I think, when people say the bow can out perform archers. That is undoubtedly true when put into a machine, but bows are shot by humans and the bow interfaces with humans and their frailties. Different bow configurations will be more tolerant of human error than others--that we know for a fact. What I don't know is how much various brands and specific equipment makes a difference. It could be that one V-Bar set up is as good as another for such purposes, and that one kind of plunger, string, or limbs is as good as another. I take Limbwalker's assertion that people make the difference not equipment very seriously. But, of course, that is his considered opinion. I'd love to see data to go with it to see exactly how true that is. We know great equipment won't make a good archer great, except that is only true within an equipment class. A good archer with a compound bow vs. a great recurve archer? Well, equipment can and does make a difference. But, limbs? I don't know, but I want facts not conjecture.


----------



## Archerone (Mar 30, 2006)

Warbow said:


> It is true that people are very prone to subjective validation. That is why science uses double blind tests to control for such things when testing subjective impressions. So, a proper "scientific" limb test would have to be double blind, if that is possible.


Before I retired, I was involved in testing different materials using apparatus/testing gauges. We would test different epoxies and their bonding strength. We did it with different mixtures and at different temperatures. I saw the limb testing apparatus at two different manufacturers. They were simple but accurate. The problem I saw was lack the testing for different variables. They might have had a program of taking out limbs and going though special stress tests in batches, but I did not see the test equipment. When I saw the epoxying setups I even had more questions with quality. Does anyone think that after the limbs are used that they can also take a different 'set' that is different from new?


----------



## Lindy (Nov 7, 2008)

*Best limb discussion. A waste of time?*

A waste of time? Heck no!

I think the discussion and contributions by the many archers, coaches, manaufactures etc. is very interesting. 

The advancements of the sport, changes in technology, the constant exchange of ideas and experiences only serves to enrich us. How boring it would be if we all decided that vanilla was the only flavor.

Yes there are as many varibles as there are archers. But sharing those thoughts, ideas and technical information makes this sport all the more interesting and challenging.

Regards and Good Shooting


----------



## omega_archer (Aug 25, 2008)

Warbow said:


> I'd love to see data to go with it to see exactly how true that is. We know great equipment won't make a good archer great, except that is only true within an equipment class. A good archer with a compound bow vs. a great recurve archer? Well, equipment can and does make a difference. But, limbs? I don't know, but I want facts not conjecture.


Now your really confusing me. Why does the equipment class matter and why are you comparing compound to recurve archers.


----------



## c3hammer (Sep 20, 2002)

b0w_bender said:


> ....I can't help but think if you felt the limbs were inferior they would perform in an inferior fashion. Not necessarily because the limbs were inferior but because you felt they were....


Another naysayer who doesn't believe in their shot 

If you don't know your shot and and don't know when you've executed it, you'll never understand the person who does and has :shade:

Cheers,
Pete


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

omega_archer said:


> Now your really confusing me. Why does the equipment class matter and why are you comparing compound to recurve archers.


Because when people say equipment doesn't matter they mean it within limits. Equipment does matter, as compound vs. recurve proves. The question that remains is not can equipment make you a better archer--it can--the question is how small a factor equipment is within the same equipment class. Clearly, the archer matters most, as limbwalker consistently notes, but equipment does make a difference, but it seems, the difference is small and chiefly of interest to people shooting at the edges of human ability.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> It's too expensive a sport to just "wing" everything.


You're exactly correct. And that is Precisely why people need to realize that a 13 year old second (or third or fourth)-hand Hoyt Radian or an 8 year old Winact riser is STILL better than the archer shooting it. Likewise, almost every set of original GM Carbon Plus or Winacts or SKY Conquests can still outshoot just about every single archer alive.

Perfect example - Forrest Blakley, 2006 Cadet National champion and individual 4th place at Jr. Worlds shooting 14 year old Radian risers that I got for $100 each, original Carbon Plus limbs (his backup set even had white glass!) I picked up for less than $150/each. He shot an incredible 637 double-70M national record with those bows in Co. Springs and both of his bows combined cost less than almost every single bow on the line. 

What really is expensive is buying equipment that is two or three times more expensive than you will ever need based on your level of shooting. But it sure does seem to be the popular thing to do. All I can say is that I hope all the folks doing just that have their mortgages paid off, because I don't feel like bailing them out. :mg:

If I had it my way, I'd make every JOAD kid out there break 1250 before they got to use anything other than a cast riser, wood limbs and ACC's. That would save their parents a truckload of money. But then, in most cases, it is the parents that are the problem...



> Because when people say equipment doesn't matter they mean it within limits.


Warbow, we're finally on the same page. 

John.


----------



## DariusXV (Feb 18, 2009)

Part of what makes this fun for many archers is the "belief" (call it faith, if you will) that certain things will give them an edge.

For some, it will be knowledge of the rules. I've seen pros win when another pro touched the "winning shot arrow" before the ref called it and lost because of that.

For some it will be equipment. The belief that having the best money can buy and hopefully wisely chosen FOR the archer might save a point or two from human error.

When it comes down to it, as much as we want it to not be, a large part of life is luck. The wind wasn't blowing much and I scored well today. I was born in a century where carbon made wood a possible second in arrow choice.

And yet we want to control everything we can...even by asking questions that can't be answered perfectly. It's just a question of whether the answers are apt..and whether the asker is learning or asking just to ask.

I love all this meaningless drivel. 

I don't like it when someone says it's pointless. It isn't.


----------



## Jason22 (Aug 16, 2008)




----------



## omega_archer (Aug 25, 2008)

DariusXV said:


> Part of what makes this fun for many archers is the "belief" (call it faith, if you will) that certain things will give them an edge.
> 
> I love all this meaningless drivel.
> 
> I don't like it when someone says it's pointless. It isn't.


Obviously I'm sucked into all the drivel as well.

Nothing wrong with discussing the latest new stuff or shooting it if you can afford it. Buy it if it makes you shoot more because shooting more should help you shoot better. I think the point is simply not trying to determine or quantify what is the "best" product out there especially for the masses.


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> You're exactly correct. And that is Precisely why people need to realize that a 13 year old second (or third or fourth)-hand Hoyt Radian or an 8 year old Winact riser is STILL better than the archer shooting it. Likewise, almost every set of original GM Carbon Plus or Winacts or SKY Conquests can still outshoot just about every single archer alive.
> 
> Perfect example - Forrest Blakley, 2006 Cadet National champion and individual 4th place at Jr. Worlds shooting 14 year old Radian risers that I got for $100 each, original Carbon Plus limbs (his backup set even had white glass!) I picked up for less than $150/each. He shot an incredible 637 double-70M national record with those bows in Co. Springs and both of his bows combined cost less than almost every single bow on the line.
> 
> ...


I'll have to agree that equipment does not make the archer. I know of a Female Recurve Cub who shot this years Indoor Nationals as a Cadet and broke all but one of the Cub, Cadet and Junior National Indoor/Indoor Fita records. (12 records in all). If she had entered the tournament as a Senior Woman, her score would have placed her 6th in that division. Her equipment consisted of a secondhand 8 year old Winact riser, a pair of used entry level wood/carbon limbs purchased for $75, one year old ACC arrows, with homemade string, grip and clicker plate. We were politely asked not to use her homemade stabilizer by one of the JDT coaches.

Not all of us JOAD parrents go overboard on equipment:smile:.

My suggestion is don't worry about the equipment, get out there and practice.


----------



## bduplin (Jun 5, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> You're exactly correct. And that is Precisely why people need to realize that a 13 year old second (or third or fourth)-hand Hoyt Radian or an 8 year old Winact riser is STILL better than the archer shooting it. Likewise, almost every set of original GM Carbon Plus or Winacts or SKY Conquests can still outshoot just about every single archer alive.
> 
> Perfect example - Forrest Blakley, 2006 Cadet National champion and individual 4th place at Jr. Worlds shooting 14 year old Radian risers that I got for $100 each, original Carbon Plus limbs (his backup set even had white glass!) I picked up for less than $150/each. He shot an incredible 637 double-70M national record with those bows in Co. Springs and both of his bows combined cost less than almost every single bow on the line.
> 
> ...


Yes, but if you are middle aged, can afford it, like in cars, boats or women, QUALITY can be fun without being a professional


----------



## Jason22 (Aug 16, 2008)

As a JOAD kid I really wanted Carbon Limbs but my coach told me (and my family) that I should achieve Olympian with wood/glass limbs first, then be rewarded with the limbs once I had done so. 

I think that was very wise and it helped me keep my focus on what mattered most. As I progressed I upgraded in poundage and quality of limbs, arrows, etc. Of course if you can afford it and if you want it and get joy out of it, go for it. Your dollars fuel R&D in recurve archery and that's great!  

My Concern:
I really hope kids and new archers reading these forums don't think they *need *$600 limbs to achieve elite scores because *you absolutely positively do not*.


----------



## DariusXV (Feb 18, 2009)

Most people don't need a Ferrari, nor can MOST people afford one.

Sitting behind the wheel, even if you aren't a professional driver, you can tell so much about quality. It can inspire you...make you want to do the things necessary in order to have one or be worthy of one.

All of the equipment I own is "better" than me. I take a lot of comfort in that. It means that I have no one to blame other than myself. And when I perform well, the equipment is doing its part. I trust it.

We sub-1400 archers might not need anything other than a stick and a string. Interestingly enough, it is often postulated that 1400+ archers could probably score as well WITH a stick and string. 

But once you know what a Ferrari feels like (re: a quality limb), it's hard not to make this your new plateau. 

No amount of eqipment will overcome the ability of the archer, but it is possible that other factors could augment it. It feels good to have nice equipment. I feels even better doing well with it.


----------



## b0w_bender (Apr 30, 2006)

I bought a hoyt Helix riser and G3 limbs because as a 4H leader and a coach I wanted people to know I was serious about the sport. however I'm reasonably certain I could shoot the 25# Mohegan just as well at 20 yards as I do the Helix.

Here is where I place high end equipment in the importance of quality archery

-Confidence
-Positive attitude
-Practice Practice Practice
-Good form
-your pets name
-Top of the line equipment


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

For some people...it's just to easy to make assumptions over the internet which can often cause prejudice and accusatory remarks.

Just because some of us enjoy talking about equipment and researching the different characteristics that can make a limb or equipment choice an advantage or more beneficial...does NOT automattically make us obsessive or mean that we are going overboard regarding equipment.

For some of us...it's just an indication of how passionate we are about our sport and everything that applies to it.

Some of us who like to discuss equipment choices...also discuss form, aiming and practice techiniques just as passionately.

I'm intrigued about everything archery related...so before anyone jumps to any conclusions...they need to address the person as an individual rather than just lumping them into a preconceived idea of who they are or why they enjoy discussing topics like these.

Ray


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

DariusXV said:


> Most people don't need a Ferrari, nor can MOST people afford one.
> 
> Sitting behind the wheel, even if you aren't a professional driver, you can tell so much about quality. It can inspire you...make you want to do the things necessary in order to have one or be worthy of one.
> 
> ...


:thumbs_up

I have to laugh when folks say "What's the point in owning a Ferrari if you can only drive it 60mph. I like the flip side of the quote: "If I can only drive 60mph, please let me do it in a Ferrari!". 

Disclaimer: I have never owned a Ferrari, but I did once own a 1967 Jaguar XKE tri-carb 4.2L roadster.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

i have always found great pleasure in owning the best i can afford.....but that's just me...


----------



## Custard (Feb 23, 2007)

> i have always found great pleasure in owning the best i can afford.....but that's just me...


Yeh, but what are the best?:confused2:


----------



## Custard (Feb 23, 2007)

Hey jmvargas, just looked at your profile, those limbs would be my choice also. Border lead and others follow.:flame:


----------



## JDT_Dad (Nov 5, 2008)

I think we are seeing two camps of opinion on this thread. 

The first camp wants to own the "best" limb they can afford. They take some pride and or comfort in owning high end equipment.

The other group seems to be saying, the limb doesn't matter since even very old used limbs are better than most archers, so why bother discussing which is best.

To a degree, I think I am in both camps. If I am putting out a whole bunch of money on new limbs, I would like to have as much input as possible. For example, If I have it on very good opinion that a particular model of limb is very harsh, unforgiving and slow when compared to another similarly priced limb, then I will avoid the slow harsh and unforgiving limb. Lists of limbs with an opinion as to why the archer liked or disliked a particular limb can be useful.

A simple list of the top limbs is of no use to me. Simply listing the top (5) limbs really means nothing without the rational backing it up. A list of limbs with the reasons for picking them is much more useful. I might not agree with a persons rational for picking a particular limb, but that's OK.

All of that said, I wouldn't expect higher scores because of the equipment. As I have mentioned in a previous post, even old risers, and used entry level limbs can break national records. Certainly high end equipment is far better than all but the most elite archer. Only good coaching, and lots of smart training will raise scores in a meaningful way.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

The FACTS are:

1. We are human...therefore we make mistakes and we are not perfect...even for those of us who can compete at the highest level of competition.

2. Alot of the high end equipment that some of us are interested in...can lesson the effects of human error...which can help an archer accumulate more points...even if it's minimal.

3. A bow and arrow can't shoot itself...therefore it's the person shooting the bow that makes it perform.

4. I have seen and I have read about scores improving by as much as 10% by making changes in equipment....be it a riser, limbs, stabilizers, fletching and/or arrows as examples. Changing any one or a combination of those can improve an archer's score.

5. When COMPARING equipment and scores...if an improvement of 10% in score is seen...than it can be determined that the score was 90% archer and 10% equipment change...and something similar can be said about an improvement of 2% equalling 98% archer and 2% equipment.

6. Even at a generous 10% increase in score...it is still highly and primarily based on the archer's ability....so if an archer wants to increase their score...they will have much better and more noticable results by working on their techinique while trying to become more machine like.

Ray


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

c3hammer said:


> It is rumored the Park Sung Hung shot 12 different pairs of Masters limbs testing for score. The worst pair was incapible of even shooting 1200. With the best pair she shot her 1405 world record.


Well, that's enough to put me off Samick.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

Marcus said:


> Well, that's enough to put me off Samick.


Just because you don't know how many pairs of limbs have been tested and discarted by other top level archers using other limbs....


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

Vittorio said:


> Just because you don't know how many pairs of limbs have been tested and discarted by other top level archers using other limbs....


.......well said vittorio...


----------



## Toxothise1440 (Nov 30, 2008)

jmvargas said:


> .......well said vittorio...


How is rumour and innuendo with no actual facts "well said"?

Just wondering.


----------



## Jason22 (Aug 16, 2008)

Marcus said:


> Well, that's enough to put me off Samick.


Pete said up front that it was a rumor and therefore unverified. She is sponsored by Samick so some or all limbs could have been prototypes or some may have been too high of poundage. We don't have all of the facts.

I have been pleased with my Extreme BF's and have owned 3 sets. The only issue I have had with my Samick gear is that it took me nearly 3 months to get a replacement Ultra Agulla Grip through Lancaster, but that could have been Lancaster's fault rather than Samicks. They were the only vendor that Samick said I could buy the grip from in the USA but K1 Archery can also get Samick gear.

Samick limbs won 14 out of 24 medals in Beijing.


----------



## RHC (Jul 5, 2006)

As a TRD archer fairly new to ILF limbs I have tried to purchase top end limbs.I have a set of Winex and a set of Masters.I really enjoy these discussions if for no other reason than to learn I don't have to spend as much on my next set of limbs.

Maby a better question for me would be,"What is the difference in a $200-$300 set of limbs and a $500-$600 set of limbs? I don't mind paying the difference if I am getting,for example,better quality control or higher grade materials.It doesn't matter to me if I can shoot well enough to take advantage of the difference or not.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

Toxothise1440 said:


> How is rumour and innuendo with no actual facts "well said"?
> 
> Just wondering.


Because Vittorio is countering the impact of one unknown (a rumor about Samick) with the fact that it only seems significant if you assume the same isn't true for other brands, another unknown. Therefore, Vittorio has squashed the power of the rumor with a simple thought experiment. Therefore well said.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

RHC said:


> It doesn't matter to me if I can shoot well enough to take advantage of the difference or not.


Whether you shoot well enough or not...the advantage is till there...it's just that you might not be able to recognise or discern if your score increase is because of you or a change in your equipment.

That's usually the difference between a high ranking shooter and an archer that is still developing their techinique.

Ray


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

Warbow said:


> Because Vittorio is countering the impact of one unknown (a rumor about Samick) with the fact that it only seems significant if you assume the same isn't true for other brands, another unknown. Therefore, Vittorio has squashed the power of the rumor with a simple thought experiment. Therefore well said.


Well said 

Ray


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

> 2. Alot of the high end equipment that some of us are interested in...can lesson the effects of human error


Sometimes they can exaggerate human error as well. I suspect that many people, buying the higher end gear, aren't capable of utilizing the minute performance differences between the limbs. There are lots of people who have high-end stuff that shoot poorly because of this...it can hold you back as well as help improve. 

High-end stuff is appropriate ONLY if the technique and form matches the ability of the gear. A $25.00 arrow won't give a person the advantage unless they have the ability to shoot it as it's designed. (I just placed 6th in the Canadian National Indoors (Barebow-no sights) using Easton 1716 JAZZ arrows out of DAS(Kap) CC limbs - ACCs 'might' have gotten me to 5th place, but the guys above me would have beaten me anyway with whatever arrow they shot!)

As mentioned. It's the person behind the gear...not the gear itself.


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

bradd7 said:


> Sometimes they can exaggerate human error as well. I suspect that many people, buying the higher end gear, aren't capable of utilizing the minute performance differences between the limbs. There are lots of people who have high-end stuff that shoot poorly because of this...it can hold you back as well as help improve.


High end equipment can only "hold you back" if having it makes you practice less or not work hard.



bradd7 said:


> High-end stuff is appropriate ONLY if the technique and form matches the ability of the gear. A $25.00 arrow won't give a person the advantage unless they have the ability to shoot it as it's designed. (I just placed 6th in the Canadian National Indoors (Barebow-no sights) using Easton 1716 JAZZ arrows out of DAS(Kap) CC limbs - ACCs 'might' have gotten me to 5th place, but the guys above me would have beaten me anyway with whatever arrow they shot!)
> 
> As mentioned. It's the person behind the gear...not the gear itself.


While the person is the most important factor, your success with jazz arrows is **indoors** at close range, where the variability of arrows makes less of a difference than it does at longer, outdoor distances. And better arrows will make your groups tighter, but the percentage difference it makes may be imperceptible depending on how large your groups are. (With the definition of "better" being arrows that make tighter groups, of course.) It is just basic physics. If one set of arrows makes a 1 foot group out of a hooter shooter at 50 an another a 2 foot group, then, all things being comparable, the second set of arrows will always make your group 1 foot larger. So, the question isn't whether better arrows will make your groups smaller, the question is whether the difference will be significant to you vs. the cost.


----------



## bradd7 (Oct 17, 2008)

> So, the question isn't whether better arrows will make your groups smaller, the question is whether the difference will be significant to you vs. the cost.


There ya go...that is what I was 'trying' to say...lol

For many, high-performance gear is a waste of money and a lot of 'hoping' or an ego based-decision. 

For others, willing to put in the work and training, higher-end gear becomes a necessity when finite accuracy/consistency cannot be achieved or maintained to get the point necessary to win. But by then they 'should' know when the gear cost is justified, and will 'know' what limbs/arrows/riser will give them the best performance...then cost or name (high or low) doesn't matter.

IMHO: In short, we buy gear (only if and when) it will help us win more, not to hope it will help us win more...there is a difference.


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

bradd7 said:


> In short, we buy gear (only if and when) it will help us win more, not to hope it will help us win more...there is a difference.


The fact is...if it helps a top level archer...it can help an entry or intermediate level archer...they just won't be able to discern if it's the equipment or themselves or be able to exploit the advantages as effectively as a top level archer could.

The way you find out if it's the gear improving you scores is by comparing the scores shot with certain equipment to those with other equipment. A pattern should begin to emerge and indicate what's happening.

Bottom line - 5. When COMPARING equipment and scores...if an improvement of 10% in score is seen...than it can be determined that the score was 90% archer and 10% equipment change...and something similar can be said about an improvement of 2% equalling 98% archer and 2% equipment.


Ray


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> The worst pair was incapible of even shooting 1200


I find this almost impossible to believe. I've shot dozens of different pairs of ILF limbs and have yet to find a single pair that wasn't capable of holding gold at 70 meters. While I wasn't shooting 1400's, I'd say that's a hair better than a 1200 score... Let's keep the stories to firsthand knowlege at least.

John.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

thanks to Warbow and Black Wolf........


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

c3hammer said:


> It is rumored the Park Sung Hung shot 12 different pairs of Masters limbs testing for score. The worst pair was incapible of even shooting 1200. With the best pair she shot her 1405 world record.


If I had to guess...that seems like a distorted rumor or an exaggeration at best.

That would be an 18% difference based on changing limbs ALONE.

I just don't see that rumor as being the truth...especially when we consider Park's shooting ability and the reputation of Samick limbs. I just can't see limbs making that big of a difference or being that bad regarding quality control and consistantcy within a certain line of limbs

My guess would be that a change in limbs alone would only account for about 1 - 2% difference at the most.

Ray


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

jmvargas said:


> thanks to Warbow and Black Wolf........


Not sure what you are thanking us for. Care to elaborate?

Ray


----------



## Warbow (Apr 18, 2006)

BLACK WOLF said:


> Not sure what you are thanking us for. Care to elaborate?
> 
> Ray


For backing the "well said" statement, I think.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

to warbow for explaining my "well said" comment on vittorio's thread and to you for seconding his explanation.......


----------



## BLACK WOLF (Aug 26, 2005)

jmvargas said:


> to warbow for explaining my "well said" comment on vittorio's thread and to you for seconding his explanation.......


Ahhh...I sometimes wonder if I have blonde roots :mg: 

Ray


----------



## Toxothise1440 (Nov 30, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> I find this almost impossible to believe. I've shot dozens of different pairs of ILF limbs and have yet to find a single pair that wasn't capable of holding gold at 70 meters. While I wasn't shooting 1400's, I'd say that's a hair better than a 1200 score... Let's keep the stories to firsthand knowlege at least.
> 
> John.


That is exactly my point. The ridiculous rumours from some here are not constructive.


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

The quality/performance of mass produced limbs follows a distribution curve. With a random purchase an archer might get a category A,B or C limb.

An intermediate level archer will see a problem if the limbs fall into category A and get them replaced. Will be perfectly happy with category B or C and on a practical level it doesn't matter whether the limbs are B or C.

An elite archer like Ms Park will (if sensible  ) be much more discriminating and will want category C limbs and can tell the difference between B and C. So the only methodology is to test a box full of limbs to find the category C and discard the category A and B.


----------



## spangler (Feb 2, 2007)

Joe T said:


> The quality/performance of mass produced limbs follows a distribution curve. With a random purchase an archer might get a category A,B or C limb.
> 
> An intermediate level archer will see a problem if the limbs fall into category A and get them replaced. Will be perfectly happy with category B or C and on a practical level it doesn't matter whether the limbs are B or C.
> 
> An elite archer like Ms Park will (if sensible  ) be much more discriminating and will want category C limbs and can tell the difference between B and C. So the only methodology is to test a box full of limbs to find the category C and discard the category A and B.


Mr. Tapley,

It is come to our attention that for quite some time now you have been ruining good internet arguments with logic, science, and even math. This is unacceptable internet behavior. The internet is a medium of discussion which thrives on rumor, emotion, name calling, people saying things they would never say in person, and everyone thinking they are the smartest person around. Your interjections of hard science have NO PLACE on an internet discussion board, and certainly not in threads designed simply to start arguments.

Please hand in your internet usage card sir, and I'm going to have to ask you to unplug your computer.

-Andrew (Internet Police Investigator #69)


----------



## Archerone (Mar 30, 2006)

limbwalker said:


> I find this almost impossible to believe. I've shot dozens of different pairs of ILF limbs and have yet to find a single pair that wasn't capable of holding gold at 70 meters. While I wasn't shooting 1400's, I'd say that's a hair better than a 1200 score... Let's keep the stories to firsthand knowlege at least.
> 
> John.


As I wrote earlier in this thread: 'When my daughter changed over to recurve we started to get limbs that had problems. It got to the point that the manufacturer stopped production until the problem was fixed. Those limbs ruined her confidence for a long time. The limbs would twist and become unstrung coming to full draw. They did not do that until shot for a while. Had to pull out of the National Indoor when it started. The archers in the lane next to her were affected also.'

These limbs were the top of the line. I am definite that you would not have been able to shoot 1200 on them. I remember this statement from the manufacturer. ' I had to shut down production after finding problems with 30 pairs while personally going down and testing them.' 

Those problems caused the limbs to twist at full draw and we personally sent back three sets. These limbs looked great and you could only see the limb twisting slightly. The problem was the limb twist got worse the more you shot. The Company quickly found the 'Human error' part of the process and fixed it.
John, not rumor....FACT!

I noticed on here someone talking about their Radian and limbs. It was well known that some of those risers had a twisting problem. Hoyt did replace many of them because of limb alignment problems. Cast risers did not have the inherent machining stresses which causes the metal to move.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Let me guess, she was shooting G3's?

Correct about the radian risers, but if you could find straight ones, or straight enough ones, they shot wonderfully. How I lucked into two straight radians for $100 each, well, there's someone who posts here regularly that can feel pretty good about having helped that young man out. He knows who he is 

Sure, there are going to be issues with specific limbs. Always have been and probably always will be especially as manufacturers try new construction ideas and designs (Synerzy's anyone?)... And sometimes specific batches of glue or materials are just bad. There was a rash of G3 limb explosions back in '04-'06 that you couldn't help but notice if you attended any of the major events those years... Really screwed up a lot of archers at the time. I watched in amazement firsthand while one of my teammates shot a pair of limbs in Athens that would effectively "walk" arrows across the target for the first 10-12 shots or so... Talk about not giving you a lot of confidence...!

So yes, the odd limbs do exist. However, the vast majority are so much more capable than the archer using them (JOAD kids using G3's? WHAT?) that it's not worth even discussing.

John.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

spangler said:


> Mr. Tapley,
> 
> It is come to our attention that for quite some time now you have been ruining good internet arguments with logic, science, and even math. This is unacceptable internet behavior. The internet is a medium of discussion which thrives on rumor, emotion, name calling, people saying things they would never say in person, and everyone thinking they are the smartest person around. Your interjections of hard science have NO PLACE on an internet discussion board, and certainly not in threads designed simply to start arguments.
> 
> ...


Great post, Andrew! I consider Joe T. and Vittorio the "snopes.com" of archery. I would include GT in that group as well. 

Kids, if you really want an archery education, spend a few hours to go through every post that these gentlemen have posted on the three major boards over the last few years.


----------



## jmvargas (Oct 21, 2004)

Seattlepop said:


> Great post, Andrew! I consider Joe T. and Vittorio the "snopes.com" of archery. I would include GT in that group as well.
> 
> Kids, if you really want an archery education, spend a few hours to go through every post that these gentlemen have posted on the three major boards over the last few years.


.....i beg to disagree on including GT in that group..his expertise is limited to Hoyt and Easton products only......going thru his posts whenever he comments on his competitor's products will definitely give you the "wrong" archery education..... JMHO.


----------



## Morris Jacks (Sep 7, 2021)

whiz-Oz said:


> The arguments about which limbs are "best" will never go away and here is why.
> 
> They are all identical in function.
> They are virtually identical in look.
> ...


So I been 


whiz-Oz said:


> The arguments about which limbs are "best" will never go away and here is why.
> 
> They are all identical in function.
> They are virtually identical in look.
> ...


So I been having problems with limbs cracking on my crossbow. So question is what is better aluminum are fiberglass? I thinking of getting some limbs made at machine shop out of aluminium and putting them on my crossbow and seeing how they would work . I just looking for any info anyone mite have about how to keep limbs from cracking? I tired of every year or other year having to replace limbs on crossbow.


----------



## whiz-Oz (Jul 19, 2007)

Morris Jacks said:


> So I been
> 
> So I been having problems with limbs cracking on my crossbow. So question is what is better aluminum are fiberglass? I thinking of getting some limbs made at machine shop out of aluminium and putting them on my crossbow and seeing how they would work . I just looking for any info anyone mite have about how to keep limbs from cracking? I tired of every year or other year having to replace limbs on crossbow.


You realise that nobody makes limbs out of Aluminium? Like absolutely nobody?
No bending things at all are made out of aluminium. 
Maybe everyone is wrong. Get some made.


----------



## IGluIt4U (Sep 22, 2004)

Morris Jacks said:


> So I been
> 
> So I been having problems with limbs cracking on my crossbow. So question is what is better aluminum are fiberglass? I thinking of getting some limbs made at machine shop out of aluminium and putting them on my crossbow and seeing how they would work . I just looking for any info anyone mite have about how to keep limbs from cracking? I tired of every year or other year having to replace limbs on crossbow.


We do have a crossbow forum here where this would be better suited... I expect you will get a similar response, but they may be able to advise you better.









CrossbowTalk.com Crossbow Forum


Welcome to CrossbowTalk.com




www.archerytalk.com


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

whiz-Oz said:


> You realise that nobody makes limbs out of Aluminium? Like absolutely nobody?
> No bending things at all are made out of aluminium.
> Maybe everyone is wrong. Get some made.


Early Win&Win Synergy limbs used Titanium mesh in one of the layers. Did not work well though.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

chang said:


> Early Win&Win Synergy limbs used Titanium mesh in one of the layers. Did not work well though.


Not at all. Sinerzy limbs were made very different than you think and are today still among the best limbs ever made. Titanium was in thin layers inside the composite wood making the core, helping it to get the convex shape they needed, Simply, they were too much complicated and expensive to make, so Titanium layer in the core has been replaced by carbon in second generation, but that did not work, so W&W stopped production. 

Aluminium or Titanium full layers can't work at all in limbs as they are not elastic materials.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Synerzy limbs were an interesting take on the convex limb shape that came around the same time as O.L. Adcock's groundbreaking (and patented) ACS longbow limb design. It used a convex shape to stiffen the limb tips - not the middle of the limb - and therefore maintained stiffness in the ends while reducing significant amounts of weight. It was and still is a brilliant design and it's still used in the ACS limbs produced by A&H and Dryad bows. Eventually, I believe Mike at Dryad or John at A&H (or both) figured out how to make an ACS recurve limb although I've still never seen one. It makes more sense to put the convex cross section in the non-working outboard ends of the limb to reduce weight but maintain the stiffness. I never thought the Synerzy limbs had it quite right, although the idea was similar.


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

Vittorio said:


> Not at all. Sinerzy limbs were made very different than you think and are today still among the best limbs ever made. Titanium was in thin layers inside the composite wood making the core, helping it to get the convex shape they needed, Simply, they were too much complicated and expensive to make, so Titanium layer in the core has been replaced by carbon in second generation, but that did not work, so W&W stopped production.
> 
> Aluminium or Titanium full layers can't work at all in limbs as they are not elastic materials.


Several archers got cut by that layer though.. It was the highest de-lamination rate limb I've ever seen.


----------



## chang (Sep 16, 2008)

limbwalker said:


> Synerzy limbs were an interesting take on the convex limb shape that came around the same time as O.L. Adcock's groundbreaking (and patented) ACS longbow limb design. It used a convex shape to stiffen the limb tips - not the middle of the limb - and therefore maintained stiffness in the ends while reducing significant amounts of weight. It was and still is a brilliant design and it's still used in the ACS limbs produced by A&H and Dryad bows. Eventually, I believe Mike at Dryad or John at A&H (or both) figured out how to make an ACS recurve limb although I've still never seen one. It makes more sense to put the convex cross section in the non-working outboard ends of the limb to reduce weight but maintain the stiffness. I never thought the Synerzy limbs had it quite right, although the idea was similar.


Yamaha Super Ceramics Carbon had similar system, that was the power recurve near the tip. The extra horizontal deformation allows more energy to be stored. I found the W&W synergy has no extra fiber orientated horizontally to reinforce the convex section.


----------



## >--gt--> (Jul 1, 2002)

whiz-Oz said:


> You realise that nobody makes limbs out of Aluminium? Like absolutely nobody?
> No bending things at all are made out of aluminium.
> Maybe everyone is wrong. Get some made.


Well, that’s true today (except for an exceptionally bad decision made by a compound company in Oregon about a decade ago)- but in the late 1940’s and early 50’s (when lawyers were less of a thing) plenty of bows were produced with aluminum limbs or aluminum laminations, as were the first Head skis.

Fred Bear was nearly put out of business because of this. From 1949-51 he produced several bow models with aluminum laminations (which were supposedly salvaged from B17 skins)- all of which had a tendency to fail, besides unpleasantly violent shock on release. His insistence on good warranty coverage nearly killed the company, but it survived. Barely.

And the all-aluminum Par-X bows (which kicked like a mule) had a nasty habit of breaking at about the 3-4000 shot mark, maiming a number of people. There were a few others- Groves, with aluminum, and Seefab of the 1930’s, with hollow tubular carbon steel limbs (even more of a hazard upon the inevitable failure- imagine a 3/4” hypodermic needle, only sharper, coming at you at ~150 fps)

No one puts aluminum, or any other non-ferrous metal, in current bow limbs as a structural element today. Which isn’t to say it can’t be done properly, with the proper materials and preparations, just that no one does it now.

And bow limbs operate at a fraction of the stress levels found in a crossbow.


----------

