# What is the ideal recurve bareshaft tune for indoors??



## Drowsy (May 9, 2013)

Like the title says, I'm wondering what the ideal bareshaft tune for indoor Olympic recurve would be. I've heard some people like to set their arrows slightly stiff, and nock high? 

I'm in the process of re-tuning my bow. I switched from a 18 strand 8190 string to a 20 strand 8125 string. I am currently shooting 700 spine Medallion XRs at full length. 

Any advice would be appreciated.


----------



## c365 (May 15, 2013)

I don't know what ideal would be for indoors but I get my bareshafts to make bullet holes. I just got a dozen XR's last week. With the great Medallion breakoff points (where you can add a breakoff back on if needed unlike Easton) you can pretty much get a perfect tune. Took them to the range and shot the tightest group so far for me and walk back from 20-70m with just the slightest sight adjustment, just a couple clicks on windage.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Consider this: Once the arrow has left the string, being indoor or outdoor, short or long distance, does it matter if it were dynamically stiffer or softer?

If the arrow is tuned for one distance, that same arrow is tuned for all distances. Largely true. If you suspect that a shorter distance requires it to be stiffer, then it is not really tuned for the long distance, is it?

I suspect the popular belief that bareshafts have to tune stiff for short distance, stems from a misunderstanding. The stiffer shafts have to be a totally different set from the outdoor arrows. A shaft that flexes too much, has a comparatively higher variation point-wise shot for shot, on a 40cm indoor target face, than at 70m on a 122cm target face. A well tuned outdoor shaft is dynamically softer than the one tuned for indoor; it can be said that an indoor shaft is not optimally tuned when one examines the nodes, but that sacrifice translates into less lateral flex, in a sort of "give and take" deal, to arrive at an optimal outcome.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

The above is based on a definition of a tuned arrow flight: The rear node transiting through the path of the front node, once the arrow has severed all contact with the string.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

"bullet holes" have a value of zero...it has little bearing on the final tune of bow/shooter. It's significantly true with recurves to to the significant flexing of the arrow. 

What you're looking for is a bare shaft to hit with a fletched shaft at the farthest distance you can shoot bare shafts well. Well being defined as slapping shafts- having them very close together. ...20 yards you should be slapping shafts with ease.

When a bare shaft is hitting with a fletched shaft it means that the fletching is doing very little work...exactly what you want. 

forget nock angle at first---just get L/R and U/D correct

Left and right will be a sign of weak/stiff arrows....though false readings can happen due to poor form or poor setup.
up and down is a tiller/nock height issue.

also, release can effect both.

Setting up a recurve is all about results based testing...it takes time to get right.


Plenty of "how to tune a recurve" papers.

tuning for 10's
easton recurve tuning guide
FITA coaches manuals


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

On the stiffer vs weaker spines for indoor or outdoor. The only reason I know to go stiffer for indoor is for those people using fat arrows...typically they're much stiffer than the draw weight calls for. To combat this, they increase the point weight to dynamically soften the spine. To me, it's pointless at 20 yards...you can make anything shoot at that distance.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Drowsy said:


> Any advice would be appreciated.


1) Indoor shoots were invented because it is too cold in winter. The practise of shooting indoors, is to prepare for the great outdoors.

2) Fattest shaft you can find, melt solder into the points until those fletched *******s start hitting straight. Cut them as short as possible. Forget bareshafts.


----------



## c365 (May 15, 2013)

I don't know about that "zero" value thing Fury. With the stiff plunger method, (TuneTens) it showed neither right or left from centershot adjustment indicating a close to perfect spine match thus a bullet hole once the nock point was tweaked. It could be I was just at that particular nodal point but nevertheless. And to test at the range with the great walkback 20-70 with bareshafts hitting exactly in the middle of the group at each distance.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Drowsy - 

In all honesty, given what folks are using these days, tune doesn't have to be perfect in the 18M/20yd arena. 
Assuming you're not using linecutters or detuning for a point on "barebow" rig, I like my bare shafts impacting dead nuts with my fletched arrows. 
While that may imply a slightly weak arrow, since I typically use bare shafts to test "my" shooting, I find that a little more convenient, see the first line in this post.

Viper1 out.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Agree with Viper1 - "dead nuts". That's a great expression, by the way - I don't hear it as often as I would like.


----------



## Drowsy (May 9, 2013)

Thanks for the replies everybody. I will keep you updated as I go on the tuning process. New string still has some stretch in it, so hopefully another 100 shots or so and it will settle. My main question was about the stiffer indoor arrows, but I think right now I am going to aim to get the fletched and bareshaft "dead nuts" together. 

I will be using the Tuning for Tens guide, but right now at 38.5 lbs on the fingers, full length CX Medallion XR 700s (110 grain points), and a 31.75" draw length, my bareshaft and fletched groups are still roughly 5 inches apart. Does this sound strange to anybody? Limb alignment is good, right now I'm using a stiff plunger with center shot straight in line with the string (as per Tuning for Tens). 

For now, I'm going to assume it's my form. I know tuning is a process, and hopefully I can get those two groups together before I bottom out my limb bolts. I just hope that my release isn't so bad that I'll need 40+ lbs OTF to get 700s to tune right.


----------



## Drowsy (May 9, 2013)

theminoritydude said:


> 1) Indoor shoots were invented because it is too cold in winter. The practise of shooting indoors, is to prepare for the great outdoors.
> 
> 2) Fattest shaft you can find, melt solder into the points until those fletched *******s start hitting straight. Cut them as short as possible. Forget bareshafts.


I've been very tempted to try 500 spine FatBoys, but... well, I'm a large guy, and I'm apprehensive to shoot an arrow called "FatBoy". =D


----------



## Drowsy (May 9, 2013)

Viper1 said:


> Drowsy -
> 
> In all honesty, given what folks are using these days, tune doesn't have to be perfect in the 18M/20yd arena.
> Assuming you're not using linecutters or detuning for a point on "barebow" rig, I like my bare shafts impacting dead nuts with my fletched arrows.
> ...


Thanks Viper1. You may recall that I asked you for advice regarding aluminum shaft selection last year, and I actually shot fairly well with 1916 platinum plus shafts, with 125 grain points. The bareshafts showed that they were still stiff, but I shot a decent score with them last season. This year, I wanted to retune the bow, and try to get a better understanding on how tuning works. I know an 18M tune doesn't have to be perfect, but I'm hoping to learn what it will take for me to get a perfect tune.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Drowsy -

We went with the 1916s for safety due to your long draw length.
If the DL has stabilized, we might be able to go a little weaker. 
For indoor, if they are showing a few inches stiff at 20 yds, you're probably fine.

Viper1 out.


----------



## Ms.Speedmaster (Dec 10, 2010)

Drowsy said:


> I will be using the Tuning for Tens guide,... my bareshaft and fletched groups are still roughly 5 inches apart. Does this sound strange to anybody? Limb alignment is good, right now I'm using a stiff plunger....


If your bare shafts are 5" left, you might want to soften that plunger a little. 

The Tuning for Tens had me finished up with a very stiff plunger, and my sight way left. I had the hardest spring in the plunger, and was shooting decent groups, but my bareshafts were way left. I put the middle spring back in and set my sight back to where it's supposed to be. The bareshafts are in with the fletched now. 

I probably goofed up somewhere, when following the directions, so take my advice with a grain of salt.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Quote Originally Posted by theminoritydude View Post
1) Indoor shoots were invented because it is too cold in winter. The practise of shooting indoors, is to prepare for the great outdoors.

2) Fattest shaft you can find, melt solder into the points until those fletched *******s start hitting straight. Cut them as short as possible. *Forget bareshafts.*

I've been very tempted to try 500 spine FatBoys, but... well, I'm a large guy, and I'm apprehensive to shoot an arrow called "FatBoy". =D
***************************************************************


*I couldn't disagree more with the 'forget bareshaft' comment.* Something about this advice sounds like "don't shower, just put on more deodorant."

I want a bow/arrow dance team that is so well matched that the arrow WANTS to go in the middle (as opposed to a sloppy setup that I have to MAKE go in the middle).


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

You're welcome to search for that two pots of gold at the ends of the rainbow.


----------



## Mika Savola (Sep 2, 2008)

Linecutters won't help your score if you can't tune them, ie. getting bareshaft close to fletched...


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Sometime early in our game, someone thought it would be a great idea to have fletched and bare shafts fly the same.

They DON'T.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> Sometime early in our game, someone thought it would be a great idea to have fletched and bare shafts fly the same.
> 
> They DON'T.


its not flying the same that matters. Its landing the same that counts. 


Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Similar yes. Same, not really.


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

THA Chapter 3.4 ...


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

theminoritydude said:


> You're welcome to search for that two pots of gold at the ends of the rainbow.


I agree that it's one of the pots at the end of the rainbow, but it's not 'mythical' - people 'get there' quite often with their tune ... If I'm getting there, I can only imagine what the bare shaft testing of the stud ducks must look like ...


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Don't think bare shaft tuning as such has any meaning at 18m. The only viable method is essentially a group tune, though each arrow needs a separate target to avoid breakages. You are just minimizing the average arrow distance from the center. At 18m any separation of bare and fletched arrows will be down to archer variability only (e.g aiming ).

In short THA 3.4


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

lksseven said:


> I agree that it's one of the pots at the end of the rainbow, but it's not 'mythical' - people 'get there' quite often with their tune ... If I'm getting there, I can only imagine what the bare shaft testing of the stud ducks must look like ...
> View attachment 2068743
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

theminoritydude said:


> lksseven said:
> 
> 
> > I agree that it's one of the pots at the end of the rainbow, but it's not 'mythical' - people 'get there' quite often with their tune ... If I'm getting there, I can only imagine what the bare shaft testing of the stud ducks must look like ...
> ...


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

Joe T said:


> Don't think bare shaft tuning as such has any meaning at 18m. The only viable method is essentially a group tune, though each arrow needs a separate target to avoid breakages. You are just minimizing the average arrow distance from the center. At 18m any separation of bare and fletched arrows will be down to archer variability only (e.g aiming ).


Agreed.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

theminoritydude said:


> Agreed.


So, this is what you're agreeing to? This pic seems to insinuate an emphasis on tuning so that bare shafts act like and group with fletched arrows indoors (posted here from The Heretic Archer, page 51, without Vittorio's permission - I hope they have an archery range in prison!):


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

That is what I'm agreeing to. Group tune. 

What seems to be the problem?


----------



## Vittorio (Jul 17, 2003)

lksseven said:


> ...- I hope they have an archery range in prison!):
> View attachment 2068826


I'll make sure they will have one for you :wink:

Tuning for short distance indoor cancels any additionl variable as flight distance is very short, so you get back to the origin only, that means how the arrow comes out from the bow and how long it takes to stop oscillating. if you cant get all your bareshafts hitting the gold consistently your bow is NOT well tuned, or/and, your bare shafts are NOT consistent each other. 
Basically, you have to tune the bow using bare shafts only after pre-selecting them, if you are consisten enough in your release. Vanes in this situation just compensate for excess of deviation at the release. First you tune the bow by groups of bare shafts only, then you add vanes and shoot again checking what is the most forgiving "wing" set up you can get. Average archer can anyhow just limit the tuning to get fletched and bare shafts toghether (inside the Xten), and this is ok up to 585 score or even more, but if you would like to get over 595, the matter becomes totally different, really totally different.

Just to mention, at national team level it is quite normal tune and shoot BS only scoring 60 arrows to check level reached. It should be >580 if you want >590 in competition with vanes on shafts.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

^ this guy.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

while a center shot setting can be done, it's typically not going to work for finger shooters. If you look further down the page on tuning for tens, you'll see where it indicates that for a RH shooter to have the RT edge of the shaft touching the left edge of the string...just a starting position. 

On your spine and arrow length....depending on limb makeup- that could be a weak spine. If so, you can adjust brace height to compensate. I had to do just that last night on my bow--shooting about 40# OTF, 660's cut to 28.75" 100grn points. Those arrows were great on my other limbs (Kaya Tropics- 9.25" brace- wood carbon) but my newer W&W Pro Accents (carbon foam), I had to shrink the brace to 8.5"- arrows were 30" prior.

This was a multi step process to figure out what I needed to do to get a decent tune. First step I played with limbs in/out...this told me I needed to start cutting my arrows back- so I cut a little...tested- BS/fletching much closer. I didn't have much I could cut so I left it at that. I was still getting BS too far out so I started playing with brace height. As I was shrinking the BH, the BS started getting closer in.

Though most of the time we tune by sound for brace height...brace height tuning can also tune L/R bare shaft impact.


http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=1797691


----------



## Mulcade (Aug 31, 2007)

lksseven said:


> So, this is what you're agreeing to?


Larry, quit feeding the trolls. :darkbeer:


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

theminoritydude said:


> That is what I'm agreeing to. Group tune.
> 
> What seems to be the problem?


I guess "communication" is the problem. You said:

- "2) Fattest shaft you can find, melt solder into the points until those fletched *******s start hitting straight. Cut them as short as possible. Forget bareshafts."

- "When you do find that pot of "gold", did you find the end of that rainbow?
Is that really gold?"

Said sentences I still don't quite understand, other than you were seeming to insinuate that grouping bare shafts with fletched was a 'pie in the sky' fantasy ... that is what I was disagreeing with, and which Vittorio seems to be disagreeing with, also.

But now you say you agree with group tuning, but still hold that one should 'forget bareshaft tuning'? Well, everyone agrees with group tuning. The disagreement lies in that you dismiss bare shaft tuning as a benefit, and I see it as a significant benefit. You're recommending to 'forget bare shafts' and keep hammering stuff onto the fletched arrows to 'make' them go in the center - and likely masking all kinds of underlying issues. My opinion is that bareshaft tuning would give you a great advantage of a forgiving tune, where the arrow wanted to go straight toward the middle, without having to be bullied into going to the middle with big ass vanes and a bucket of solder on the points. I'll be happy to line up against that rig all winter.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Mulcade said:


> Larry, quit feeding the trolls. :darkbeer:


Hah! I can't help it - I'm trying to avoid this stack of paperwork on my desk! 

But that dark beer is giving me an attractive lunch plan ...


----------



## acco205 (Jun 13, 2014)

Ugh...guys... are we forgetting the whole point of bareshaft tuning??

You are NOT tuned when your bareshaft lands with the group. Your bareshaft tuning, particularly at close distances is just going to help you get in the ballpark to begin fine tuning your equipment.

Starting with a bullet hole is great, finishing with a bullet hole is not your goal. Finishing with bareshafts flying perfectly and landing with the group is not your goal.

Bareshaft tuning is only the starting point. Your "ideal bareshaft tune for indoor" (or outdoor) is going to be whatever your bareshaft does when you're actually done tuning. If thats a bullet hole, awesome. If its stiff, cool. If its weak, great. As long as your group is small, neat and in the gold.


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

lksseven said:


> I guess "communication" is the problem.


I think your misunderstanding is the problem.



lksseven said:


> Said sentences I still don't quite understand, other than you were seeming to insinuate that grouping bare shafts with fletched was a 'pie in the sky' fantasy ... that is what I was disagreeing with, and which Vittorio seems to be disagreeing with, also.


You should verify if he was disagreeing with me. I'll explain the rainbow analogy: The pot of gold at the end of the rainbow is the reward for finding the end of the rainbow. However, there is no such thing as the end of the rainbow, because a rainbow is a circle, a loop, but due to the lack of altitude, most people see it as an arc, and a myth was thus born that a rainbow must have sprung from something of value, like a pot of gold. The true purpose of finding the end of the rainbow, is the realisation that there is no such thing. Hence when someone claims to have found the pot of gold, one claims to have found the end of that rainbow, but we all know, that is a lie. SO either the claimant is lying, or he is mistaken about whatever he found being a pot of gold.



lksseven said:


> But now you say you agree with group tuning, but still hold that one should 'forget bareshaft tuning'?


I think you might be confusing the two. They both employ bareshafts, but their details differ.



lksseven said:


> Well, everyone agrees with group tuning. The disagreement lies in that you dismiss bare shaft tuning as a benefit


^



lksseven said:


> You're recommending to 'forget bare shafts' and keep hammering stuff onto the fletched arrows to 'make' them go in the center .....


'Make' them fly straight. A badly tuned bow can deliver the arrows to the center too.

You're mistaking recommendations with technical correctness. The OP is in a stage where he (she? sorry I'm not sure) is looking for a good and reasonable way to shoot a reasonable score. 

As the OP states : "I've heard some people like to set their arrows slightly stiff, and nock high?"

The OP is interested in the understanding of the advantages of a set if stiff arrows. Tailoring to the OP's needs, I have designed a straightforward way to demonstrate the very advantage he (or she) has heard about. This increased "stiffness" however, runs counter to the bareshaft tuning method that you, and many before you, have been prescribing to archers around yourselves. It has its benefits, but it also has its logical flaws. The logical flaw is this:

"As long as the bareshaft and fletched arrows group together, the bow is tuned."

A tuned bow is a human construct. Its objective is to minimise the group size of a number of shots. As human participation is inherently a very random input, the results of a tune is at best empirical; there is no way to objectively conclude that a bow is tuned, only subjectively, by comparison over a large number of repetitions, between different setups. Your argument for grouping bareshaft with fletched arrows inevitably equates to this statement:

"As long as the bareshaft and fletched arrows group together, the group is minimised."

Think about that for a minute.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

theminoritydude said:


> I think your misunderstanding is the problem.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, before my 'this thread induced' nap this afternoon, my takeaway is:
1) the rainbows and unicorns were your introduction/construct, and while I fully admit to 'not understanding your posts', I'm not convinced that my lack of understanding is the source of the problem. 
2) I continue to believe that tuning parameters so that bare shafts go in the 10ring and so do the fletched shafts is a good thing
3) as a bare shaft is a harsher critic of my human inconsistencies than the fletched shaft is, if the tuning variables available to me on my bow and my arrows are adjusted in such a combined manner that the bow and arrows can more often ignore/forgive my inconsistencies from release to release, then that's: 1) a well tuned (to me!) bow/arrow combo, as well as 2) being a good thing. That is also what is being demonstrated by Vittorio's picture on page 51.
4) my thrust of the benefits of a well tuned/closely knit grouping of bareshafts AND fletched arrows did obliquely address the OP, as a reasoned argument of the superior advantages to be gained from bareshafts being closely knit to fletched shafts, as opposed to bare shafts acting stiff, and detached in grouping, and a harsher response to archer imperfection. 

In other words, why in the world would I _want_ to shoot a bow/arrow combo where the arrow wanted to shoot 5" left at 20yards until I put enough makeup (big vanes, solder globs) on it to trick it into the middle, when I can get the bow/arrow parameters combined to where the arrow is effortlessly launched to the middle, with the fletching there to 'keep' the arrows in the middle, instead of the fletchs and a solder gun being 'why' the arrows going into the middle instead of 5" left? Vittorio's picture doesn't depict bareshafts hitting 5" left of the 10ring - it shows the bareshafts grouping exactly with the fletched shafts ... how is that somehow in indication of his agreement with your "5" left is best" argument and counter to my 'everything tight and in the middle' argument?

And finally, you're creating another strawman and putting words in my mouth when you state: "Your argument for grouping bareshaft with fletched arrows inevitably equates to this statement:

"As long as the bareshaft and fletched arrows group together, the group is minimised.""

No, my argument for the desirability of bareshafts and fletched arrows hitting together is not an "inevitable equating" with your strawman "as long as the bareshaft and fletched arrows group together, the group is minimized". The first is a necessary condition, but not necessarily a sufficient condition.

Nap time...


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> Your argument for grouping bareshaft with fletched arrows inevitably equates to this statement:
> 
> "As long as the bareshaft and fletched arrows group together, the group is minimised."
> 
> Think about that for a minute.


 This will give tightest groups, but possibly not the most forgiving. Your assumption is not correct.

You should state slightly stiff arrows are more forgiving than exactly tuned to weak arrows. But the group could well be larger. 

in the end, what i think everyone is trying to say is, you start tuning at 20 and move outward in distance to the distance you will shoot. for me thats 70 meters. I get the best tune i can for groupings at 30,50 and 70 meters. Once that is done, if i happen to go back and shoot bareshaft and fletched at 20. Where ever they hit is where they hit. I dont retune. 

My tune is for the most common distance i shoot. 

for an average shooter tuning at 20, slightly stiff and nock high will be more forgiving of a bad release than a perfect tune. 


Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> This will give tightest groups, but possibly not the most forgiving.
> Chris


We weren't necessarily tuning for forgiveness. In fact, forgiveness is very loosely defined. If it is implied that forgiveness results in a small deviation from a relatively large error input, depending on whether the input is truly an error of unintended movement or an intentional "aim-off", that same "forgiveness" can be thought of as "disobedience".

In that sense, a stiffer shaft cannot be referred to as "forgiving". The use of a stiffer shaft as I have explained earlier, is to minimise the magnitude of left/right oscillation, because we do not want to play dice with where the point would punch a hole in the paper, given that the target is relatively much smaller than the ones at 70m.

If a bad release is factored in for the tune, then the archer invariably gives up the opportunity to go in the direction of the perfect tune. It's a trade-off many archers like to adopt, but I think that runs counter to the spirit of the game. A bad release should be resolved at the training stage, with proper adoption of techniques. That's why we train. We do our job, the bow does its job.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Larry -

Did you ever notice that no one has mentioned the why behind tuning. 
Better groups, more forgiving, better down range energy, yada, yada...
Those are by-products, no one has addressed the why part. 
Tuning has one simple purpose, and I seriously doubt a lot of people here get it.
At least I've never heard it mentioned...

Viper1 out.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> We weren't necessarily tuning for forgiveness. In fact, forgiveness is very loosely defined. If it is implied that forgiveness results in a small deviation from a relatively large error input, depending on whether the input is truly an error of unintended movement or an intentional "aim-off", that same "forgiveness" can be thought of as "disobedience".
> 
> In that sense, a stiffer shaft cannot be referred to as "forgiving". The use of a stiffer shaft as I have explained earlier, is to minimise the magnitude of left/right oscillation, because we do not want to play dice with where the point would punch a hole in the paper, given that the target is relatively much smaller than the ones at 70m.
> 
> If a bad release is factored in for the tune, then the archer invariably gives up the opportunity to go in the direction of the perfect tune. It's a trade-off many archers like to adopt, but I think that runs counter to the spirit of the game. A bad release should be resolved at the training stage, with proper adoption of techniques. That's why we train. We do our job, the bow does its job.


we are tuning the bow and arrow to compensate for our inconsistencies. this is called forgiveness. a stiff shaft deals with these variations and inconsistencies better than a weak spine shaft. 

Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> we are tuning the bow and arrow to compensate for our inconsistencies. this is called forgiveness.
> 
> Chris


That same forgiveness you are talking about, if it results in a larger group, could also result in the same larger group, when the inconsistency is reduced. That's the "disobedience" I was trying to describe.


----------



## chrstphr (Nov 23, 2005)

theminoritydude said:


> That same forgiveness you are talking about, if it results in a larger group, could also result in the same larger group, when the inconsistency is reduced. That's the "disobedience" I was trying to describe.


yes, and i recommend two tunings. one for tightest group and one for most forgiving. In the early to intermediate shoot stage, most forgiving is best. Later on as shooting improves, tuning for tightest group is best. Up until a year ago, i still tuned for most forgiving. But this gave me larger groups as i got my form more consistent. Now i tune for tightest group. not the fliers. 


Chris


----------



## theminoritydude (Feb 11, 2013)

chrstphr said:


> yes, and i recommend two tunings. one for tightest group and one for most forgiving. In the early to intermediate shoot stage, most forgiving is best. Later on as shooting improves, tuning for tightest group is best. Up until a year ago, i still tuned for most forgiving. But this gave me larger groups as i got my form more consistent. Now i tune for tightest group. not the fliers.
> 
> 
> Chris


I couldn't disagree.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

chrstphr said:


> *This will give tightest groups, but possibly not the most forgiving*. Your assumption is not correct.
> 
> You should state slightly stiff arrows are more forgiving than exactly tuned to weak arrows. But the group could well be larger.
> 
> ...


correct, it's a starting point. It's where someone needs to be in order to move on to forgiveness.

and
depends on what type of "bad" the release is.



Viper1 said:


> Larry -
> 
> Did you ever notice that no one has mentioned the why behind tuning.
> Better groups, more forgiving, better down range energy, yada, yada...
> ...


Isn't the purpose to get the front and back nodes of the arrow pointed at the target as the arrow clears the bow? And this node pointing needs to be in the middle of the shooters natural flaws. At least this is my understanding.

how this relates to bare shaft-- my understanding is that the less work the fletching is doing, the more accurate the arrow can be...

not sure if I'm accurate or not...but I did sleep at a Holiday Inn Experss a few times.


----------



## Mr. Roboto (Jul 13, 2012)

Good Point Viper

So what is the physics behind tuning? The way I see it, if the release is always the same, the draw length always the same, the arrow pointing at the same point with the same vector orientation with respect to the target, with the same velocity, the torque on the bow the same, the air temperature, speed and humidity in the room. And the shooter is using perfectly identical noodles for arrows, the will always strike in the same place.

I know for a fact that the reason I don't robin hood every one of my arrows is that I am the idiot behind the bow making all the variables. The arrow always goes exactly where I loosed it. Unfortunately, far too often, that is not where I want it to go.

So from a physics point of view, what benefit does tuning offer if the archer is perfect?

Pete


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Pete - 

It's like Fury said, but I wouldn't bother with the nodes.
We tune the bow (and/or arrows) so that the arrow is pointing in the same direction while sitting on the rest at anchor as it is in flight. 
That minimizes energy loss and should give the shooter the greatest latitude for inconsistencies. 

Now, it's possible that a shooter with a CONSISTENT release or bow hand/arm fubar may get better groupings with an arrows that tuned slight stiff or weak. Then it becomes the shooter's call whether to compensate for an error or correct the error. 

Too many times folks these days are more interested in how something is supposed to be, rather than why.
The why is usually simpler.
Still curious about how many people actually never thought about it that way. 

Sorry, unless you really get into semantics, the most forgiving rig will typically shoot the best groups, at least for less than perfect shooters, and I haven't met too many perfect ones. 
As I said, I want my bare shafts to impact right with my fletched ones, which by definition means the fletched arrows are slightly stiff. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Viper1 said:


> Pete -
> 
> It's like Fury said, but I wouldn't bother with the nodes.
> We tune the bow (and/or arrows) so that the arrow is pointing in the same direction while sitting on the rest at anchor as it is in flight.
> ...


Yes! I want my arrows exiting the bow in a straight laser line (or as close to laser straight as possible) to the bullseye. A good 'tune' helps facilitate that straight, efficient launch/exit. 

And the guy next to me will appreciate my quiet bow.

ps - Viper, thanks for snapping your fingers and breaking my trance! I was letting myself get pulled down the rabbit hole.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Larry -

No problem, Sir.

For the new(er) guys, that doesn't mean the arrow comes out dead straight.
They still have a "dampened oscillation" (archer's paradox), but the direction or flight path is the same as it's resting position at anchor.

Viper1 out.


----------

