# Nano's vs Mckinney II's



## montana1329 (Apr 7, 2007)

I've read topics on Nano's and Mckinney II's but haven't heard much on comparing the two. 

I'd love to know who has tried one or both of the arrows on a recurve and which one they prefer and why. 

If you were to go into a long distance competition today and had experience with Nano's or Mckinney's -- would you choose to use one of them or use an x10 or something else? Do you expect to see them in the next olympics or will it still be dominated by X10's?

Thanks! 

David


----------



## Guest (May 4, 2007)

Although not a recurve the findings should be true for both,

Nano's- alittle smaller than an ACE and heavier for comparable spine sizes
McKII's- about the same size as an ACE but lighter and alot faster than Nano's of comparable spines.

Both seem to dynamicaly spine out 2 sizes stiffer than equal static spined 
AC shafts

My wifes 3-04 (690) at 24" with 60gr point(262gr total) reacts the same as her McKII 725 at 25" with 100 gr point an is 247gr total.

I think that if you can get the distance with Nano's without pulling your sight in you most likely will go with them but if you need some alot of speed to acheive the same effect McKII will be the one's


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

I think Sean is right on.

I shot my Mk ll's in Texas last week, and had no problem reaching 90 with my 36# Winnex @ 28.5 inches and 110 grain points. Even the fog didn't slow them down. lol If I shot around 40# I might give Nano's a try, but with my poundage the Mk ll's are great. They tune easy, and group great. They are way better than I am.

I saw several sets in Texas and a couple more shooters told me they have a set ordered.

I'll be posting a listing in the Classifieds on Saturday for a nice set of X-10 600's.


----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

Dave,

What size McKII's are you using.

I have 600's for my W&WNX bow at 42# and 650's for the Inno bow at 37#.
I finally got new 600's at 29" shafts and they shoot great. I am still trying to figure out the W&W inno bow. It actually shoots the 600's better than the Winex bow. The Winex is still more smooth to draw even at 42#. I need to stop tinkering and get som practice time in before June 2nd.


Stan


----------



## st8arrow (Apr 25, 2005)

Hi Stan,

I'm shooting 725's, and the tip is about 1/4 inch past the back of the bow. I think my Winnex are probably set at about 37 # . I'm using FF187's with a small wrap, Cartel Expert points, and Meta-Nocks. I've been thinking about going to a 100 grain point, which will make them a bit stiffer, but also faster. 

The current set-up chronos at 215 fps while another machine clocks it at 217 fps. The best I ever got from my X-10s (600's) was 192 fps on those same two machines. I think all the machines out there vary a bit, but at least it gives a baseline to compare against. 

As long as they are 10's I don't really care how fast they are.

Dave


----------



## wfieldin (Mar 4, 2006)

*McKII*

Just got a set of the 725s and at 34# winex, drawing 28.5", they chrono at 197fps, my ACE 720 chrono at 192 fps (both spin wings & pin nocks). Nano's on the way, will let you know what they are shooting when I get the info.


----------



## josharcher (Apr 23, 2005)

I've also got 725's and I think there great there are lighter then navo's and I think there a little faster I also shoot winex limbs at about 34/35 pounds and I am getting about 200 fps were I was getting about 188 fps with my navo's


----------



## ksarcher (May 22, 2002)

Bill,

The 725's will work great for you. The Nanos should be there tomorrow..

Stan


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Agree with Sean's assessment, and I've recently tried both.

Different philosophy really.

Both are great shafts, but the McKinney's fit a very special niche. Those that prefer light and fast will want them, while those that prefer heavier and smaller diameter will want the Nano.

Both have proven to be world class arrows of the first order. 

Compete with ACE and X10? Certainly. There is no question about that. Dakota Sinclair finished 4th at the world team trials and actually out-shot everyone but Vic on the final day with McKinney II's. Nano's will prove to have similar success very soon I think. 

Personally, I am using the Nano's right now because they are giving me better results even than the X10. I can't use the McKinney II's because they are not made in a length I can use for the spine I need - at least yet.

But I'm a small diameter/heavy arrow guy, so I prefer that avenue anyway. I have a very long draw and shoot 48#, so sight marks and speed are not an issue for me. For others, the McKinney II's will make more sense.

Nice to have some very viable (and less expensive) options these days for sure.

John.


----------



## wfieldin (Mar 4, 2006)

*nanos*

Shot the 830 nano yesterday, arrow nock groove to end of point is 29", small flex fletch, they chrono at 192fps, similiar to my ACE 720's. MKII are just a tad faster, yet both shot consistenly in the gold at same sight setting. They seem to fly extremely straight. This was indoor only, have not had time to go outside yet. Now I have three extremely nice sets of arrows for just under a meger $1000,(it's only money).


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

If anyone has the actual diameters of the various Nano, McKinney arrow spines I'd be grateful for the information.


----------



## montana1329 (Apr 7, 2007)

*ACE or MKII, hmmmm*

Just got a dozen new ACE's 670's - still sealed. Is it worth trying to trade for Mk II's or keep the ACE's? (I mainly shoot at 18-30 meters but want to try longer range.)

What spine would you recommend for MkII? I am guessing according to the charts I am a 650? 1" past the rest is 27 1/4", 28" draw, 32# limb , but would like to move soon to #38... and eventually low 40's. 

Thanks!


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Montana,

The ACE is still a great arrow (as is the X10). Make no mistake about that. I used ACE's in '04, along with several other Olympians. 

The advantage (only if you need it) of the McKinney is the extremely light weight. So if you are struggling to reach your longest distance at all, the McKinney will get you there better than any other arrow. 

Also, you need to look two full sizes weaker in spine for a McKinney or Nano than you would normally use with an ACE or X10. So if you use 670 ACE's now, then probably something around a 750 McKinney will work best for you.

John.


----------



## montana1329 (Apr 7, 2007)

*ace's it is.*

Done & done! 
Looks like I'll be crackin' open them ACE's!
I guess I got a bit obsessed about getting the best arrows 
Thanks John!!



limbwalker said:


> Montana,
> 
> I used ACE's in '04, along with several other Olympians.
> 
> John.


----------



## tjk009 (Feb 15, 2007)

*pricing on MK II's ??*

What is the price difference as compared to ACE or x-10's?


----------



## montana1329 (Apr 7, 2007)

*x10's*

X10's are $350 just for the shafts. $80 more expensive than ACE's. And the components may cost a few bucks more than ACE ones. But I've heard the X10's are more durable.


----------



## Jimmy Sweden (Oct 24, 2005)

dont forget that hopfully this cuncurance will make both easton CX GT CT yes al of them step up one notch in qualety and down one in price(or a few for that mater)


----------



## tjk009 (Feb 15, 2007)

*what's the price of the MK II's?*

I couldn't find the price of the MKII's? I suspect they are cheaper but how much cheaper? We all know the Easton's are expensive, alternatives are good.


----------



## Targetbutt (Jan 19, 2006)

I think I saw the price for those MKII's once and they were about $270 or so. So around $20-$30 more than ACE's. Perhaps someone who has a set can confirm.


----------



## Progen (Mar 17, 2006)

Targetbutt said:


> I think I saw the price for those MKII's once and they were about $270 or so. So around $20-$30 more than ACE's. Perhaps someone who has a set can confirm.


Yeah, around there. They can use A/C/E components too so that's one thing in their favour. Not too sure about whether the shorter time they spend in the air will help when there's a wind blowing though.

Guess you can't win them all. :sad:


----------



## midwayarcherywi (Sep 24, 2006)

I dialed direct and got a price of $275. BTW, very tunable for a wide range of weights. I am able to use higher sight marks. I got the 725 spine and have tuned the set up for my 27" @ 37 pounds. Cranked up the poundage to 40 and was able to tune the arrow just fine.


----------



## VinZ (Apr 30, 2007)

Here is a short overview about prices (in $):
Easton X10 doz 380
Easton ACE doz 295
McKinney II doz 288
Soma Nano doz 270
Easton Navigator doz 194
Cartel Triple doz 165
Easton ACC doz 148

You can clearly see what arrows are competing with each other. IMO non of these are bad arrows, but ACC are not meant for 90 meter. However the wind drift of the tripel is less than ACE of similar spine/point/nock/vanes(I was also suprised)!! As I don't know the exact diameter of the mckinney I could not calculate it's wind drift (if somebody could post it in inches and spine I can compare it to others).


----------



## Zane Smith (Nov 27, 2005)

I just received some MKII and spine tested them on my RAM. I am surprised that they varied as much as .015 by turning the shaft. To give you an idea the difference I have tested ACC, ACE, NAVS, AND X10 both new and used with the average .001 by turning the shaft. I really wanted these shafts to work for my barebow setep to see 90 meters in my riser window. I don't think that I can use them knowing this variance.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Zane, I have a spine tester at home, and I've NEVER seen a spine variance of only .001. Not with Easton, not with anyone.

Are you sure about that?

The most consistent spine tolerances I've ever seen on any arrow (ACE and X10 included) were on the Carbon Express Nano. But the McKinney II's, ACE's and X10's are all exceptionally good too. 

John.


----------



## Zane Smith (Nov 27, 2005)

John, 
The RAM spine tester is very accurate . As I turned the shaft with the weight 180degrs.the needle bobbed back and forth as much as .015. When I grabbed some very used X10s the needle barely moved .001 (when turning) as do most a/c arrows. I have been down this road three years ago with carbon express SELECT shafts and a shooting machine anchored to concrete. I could not get near the group as with ACCs at 50 meters. I was really hoping to take these to National Target to reach 90 meters with my barebow set up. I returned them to lancaster today because I can not afford the risk of testing them out of my bow. ZANE


----------



## Zane Smith (Nov 27, 2005)

Maybe I should mention that I was specifically checking each arrow within its circumference to see if they have a weak side. I was not grouping the arrows in the batch.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

> I have been down this road three years ago with carbon express SELECT shafts


Well then, there is no convincing you... 

Your results are clearly different than what I've seen. So much so in fact that I wonder how they could have been achieved.

Regardless, the proof I needed was actual shooting conditions at 90 meters. The Nano's won hands down.

John.


----------



## XCalibre (Aug 31, 2006)

VinZ said:


> Here is a short overview about prices (in $):
> Easton X10 doz 380
> Easton ACE doz 295
> McKinney II doz 288
> ...


what currency are those prices in?


----------



## Marcus (Jun 19, 2002)

Joe T said:


> If anyone has the actual diameters of the various Nano, McKinney arrow spines I'd be grateful for the information.


McKinney II 500: 5.86mm
Nano 410: 5.36mm

sorry only ones I have


----------



## Joe T (Apr 5, 2003)

Marcus said:


> McKinney II 500: 5.86mm
> Nano 410: 5.36mm
> 
> sorry only ones I have


Cheers Marcus.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

I believe the Nano 490 (which compares to the 410 X10 or 400 ACE) is 5.2mm in diameter. Maybe 5.22 mm 

The Beiter out nocks for an ACE will just almost fit a Nano 490

John.


----------



## FS560 (May 22, 2002)

My Ram spine testing machine is only as accurate as my ability and technique are able to eliminate the effect of the various friction components between the machine and the arrow.

The dial contact is plastic and therefore frictional. The weight hangs on teflon hangers and is therefore also frictional.

When rotating the arrow to different measuring points around the shaft, the shaft will move sideways with the weight and must be recentered.

Rotating the arrow and just taking the reading will not produce repeatable and reliable results without allowing the arrow, weight, and indicator to stabilize which will include recentering and lightly reloading the weight on the arrow a couple of times to check repeatability.


BTW, do your dial indicators read backwards like mine? This is only an issue when checking an exact spine value for comparison with arrow specifications.


----------



## VinZ (Apr 30, 2007)

> McKinney II 500: 5.86mm
> Nano 410: 5.36mm
> sorry only ones I have


tnx, now i can enter them in little wind drift program (thank you Joe Tapley)

McKinney II 500 vs ACE 520 - McKinney less wind drift at any range.
McKinney II 500 vs Nano 410 - McKinney adv until 45 meters than nano better
Nano 410 vs ACE 430 - 25m till 45m ACE after that Nano less wind drift

calc done with:
38 pound, 31" arrow length, 100grns point, wind at 90 dgr @ 4 m/s


----------



## VinZ (Apr 30, 2007)

XCalibre said:


> what currency are those prices in?


Here is a short overview about prices (*in $*):


----------



## VinZ (Apr 30, 2007)

Please be aware: the arrow you have the most faith in will ultimately be the best arrow.
Rule of thumb: MKII is light and thus fast, Nano is thin and ‘heavy’ (like X10), ACE/X10 are barreled. 
The one _you_ think will give _you_ an advantage will probably be best for _you_.

BTW just noticed: nano 410 has the same diameter as X10 410 - 0.211" but is a little but heavier (8.64 and 8.48 gpi)


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

VinZ,

I think it's great that you're looking at this stuff objectively, but I have to tell you that you're comparing apples to oranges.

The same archer who uses a 430 ACE would NOT use a 410 Nano. More like a 490 or even 530 Nano. Likewise, you cannot compare a 410 X10 to a 410 Nano or even a 450 McKinney II.

The Nano and McKinney II shafts have a dynamic spine of TWO FULL SIZES stiffer than either an ACE or X10. This is a VERY important point when comparing the shafts objectively.

When you consider this, then the McKinney II and Nano compare even more favorably against an ACE or X10.

So, a McKinney II 500 is equal to a 400 ACE or 410 X10 from the shooter's perspective.

Likewise, a 490 Nano is equal to a 400 ACE or 410 X10. And so on...

I can tell you from personal experience that the Nano 490's with 110 points that I'm using now drift significantly less than any other arrow I've ever used. Less than even a 410 X10. At the Hoyt Days 900 round in St. Louis earlier this month, I put my first two groups in the 8 ring because a strong wind was blowing across the field. It was the 8 ring on the UPWIND side, because I was used to having to aim there in that wind condition to hit the middle. Once I figured out how little my arrows were drifting, I fired a 57, 57 and 56 at 60 meters in that same wind.

John.

John.


----------



## VinZ (Apr 30, 2007)

John,
Yes, i've seen that they are way stiffer, but I have to start somewhere. 
It's true that a MKII 500 will outperform a 400 ACE at any distance but X10 410 still has less wind drift beyond 45 meters.
A Nano 410 is the same wind drift line as X10 380 (3 mm difference in favor of Nano @90meters). I've played around with the Nano settings: it's an amazing arrow. All I do ends up like the X10. 
In short: getting Nano is like getting X10 - but at the price of an ACE (there goes my objectivity). That's according to calculations - in the end it is still the person that will have to shoot. I also think the spin wing lines on the Nano are a really good addition. I've been bugging my pro shop to get a set...no success so far :sad:


----------



## Swede (Aug 26, 2002)

limbwalker said:


> I believe the Nano 490 (which compares to the 410 X10 or 400 ACE) is 5.2mm in diameter. Maybe 5.22 mm
> 
> The Beiter out nocks for an ACE will just almost fit a Nano 490
> 
> John.


Almost but not quite? What kind of nocks are you using Limbwalker? I am a favoring the beiters as much as possible and since I have decided to get Nanos I would like to know what alternatives there are out there

Magnus


----------



## gitnbetr (Jan 17, 2007)

*490 or 530?*

John,
You have said that an ACE 430 could convert to a Nano 490 or even 530. If I am shooting an ACE 430 with the shaft alone being 32 1/8" long with a 100 gr point, drawn to 46#, should I go with the Nano 490 or 530?


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Magnus,

I'm using pins and Gold Tip pin nocks at the moment. Carbon Express/Soma are making a pin nock now, but it's a small groove and I use large groove.

I hear that Beiter is working on nock options now for the Nano. Good thing too, since I think they will prove to be incredibly popular.

I look forward to trying a Beiter nock on the Nano. I still wish Beiter would make pin nocks... 

Gitnbetr, I would steer you toward the 490. It's what I use, and your spec's are real close to my own. I use 110 grain points in mine.

John.


----------

