# ATF-X | Quality Problem & Limb Alignment Failure



## GoldArcher403

Dennis,

How far exactly can the limbs travel laterally in the pocket? I have a Nano TFT riser with NS-G limbs and if I attempt to slide them side to side, I can only move them about a half millimeter or so. This results in a net deviation of 1mm at the tip of the limb. 

As a mechanical engineer, I can tell you slop is necessary, otherwise the limb would never slide in and out of the pocket. How much yours has exactly is the question. The 0.5mm of play I have on mine is about the standard in the machining world for a smooth fit. If yours is more than that, I would blame one or both of two things:

A) The T block the limbs slide into were machined incorrectly and are outside of their LMC (least material condition) specification, allowing excessive limb play

B) The spring button in the limb is too weak and is not creating enough tension to keep the limb centered in the small groove machined in the bottom of the T block. 

Regardless of side to side play, the spring button should keep the limb centered by riding the groove in the pocket. Even if the T block is miss machined, the limb should not move around so much. Check how stiff it is.

Also, in regards to the alignment while strung, I'm not as concerned. As demonstrated when you strung your bow, it initially starts out centered. It only gets out of alignment when you man handle the bow yourself and torque the limbs over. 
Nothing in your shot should cause the limbs be get torqued over to the side. You pull the bow back, not out. As long as the bow was aligned properly in the first place, general shooting should not cause the limbs to slide over, even with that slop in the pockets. Your groups traveling around the target is probably due to something else.


----------



## Dennis2581

I'm a mechanical engineer myself and handling extreme precision parts every day. I do understand the concept of "slop" and tolerances. The thing is, that I can slide the limb sideways about 1-1.5mm in the limb pocket which must result in about 6-7mm at the tip of each limb. 

I'm not sure if you have watched the video completely. I'm covering the play in the pocket and also that we have tried a few different sets of limbs. Theoretically, the spring button (which is super tight) is never ever enough to keep the limb in line. its only purpose is (in my guess) to prevent the limb from falling out when attaching the limb and stringing the bow. In order to handle all the forces, the limb needs the actual support of the pocket itself. 

The whole thing that bothers me is that something like that leaves the manufacture's workshop who claimes to make great products. Speaking as a mechanical engineer this is just unacceptable and pure sad. Why would a manufacturer spending all its energy in a stiff and torsion-free riser when the limbs actually can float in the pockets like Dumbo's ears in the wind?

Yes, I have forced the limbs out of line to demonstrate. The same thing happens from arrow to arrow (as I've figured out yesterday) but it's a bit quicker to show it this way than assembling the whole thing on the range and filming the alignment after every few arrows. The string is always looking for the shortest distance and if there is a way for a shortcut it will do so. Have a look on highspeed videos and you see how much a riser and all of its parts are usually twisting and moving. Now imagine having a loose side fit/support around the limb pocket and how that would look like. 

The setup is super inconsistent. Just imagine having a bow that is in line with a correct (very accurate and tiny) center shoot and with the next set of arrows the bow is out of line and having a center shot that is way too extreme, or even on the other side (negative).

Don't get me wrong, I get your point but I also do have spent a few days (within the last months) with rearranging the setup because I felt my center shot was off, the alignment was off, or something else has happened and I could not figure out what was wrong. Once I had the setup it was good but within a few arrows it was off,... back and forward and all that ... You could try the bow with a bow stringer and every time it results in a different setup.

The issue with the groups traveling and the whole thing was maybe communicated a bit incorrectly (that has happened two times) what's way more common is that the groups are spreading open to on side, on the next set of arrows, they are tight or spreading open and to another side,.. bottom line, there is no consistent direction you could pick up and compensate.


----------



## GoldArcher403

My only suggestion is see what the dealer says and contact W&W directly. No tips here on AT will fix a defect riser. It unfortunately just happens sometimes. All you can do is follow up on the warranty. There should be a W&W rep for your region you can contact. 

The problem lies in the T-block, which is manufactured separately from the rest of the riser, so it is not the a problem with the riser itself. In which case, you are lucky because it is a small piece that can just be swapped out instead of having to send the whole riser back.


----------



## GoldArcher403

Dennis2581 said:


> the limb needs the actual support of the pocket itself. Why would a manufacturer spending all its energy in a stiff and torsion-free riser when the limbs actually can float in the pockets like Dumbo's ears in the wind?


Because it has to for limbs to have lateral adjustment. I don't understand what you mean by the limb needs the "support of the pocket". If the edges of the pocket fully enclosed the limb, you wouldn't be able to adjust them left or right.

The excessive play is coming from the slot in the t-block being too large.


----------



## GoldArcher403

Dennis2581 said:


> The thing is, that I can slide the limb sideways about 1-1.5mm in the limb pocket which must result in about 6-7mm at the tip of each limb.


This almost makes me think the t-block may actually be fine and is actually physically moving. It's hard to believe that much play exists. Are you positive the screws on either side of the limb pockets are tightened down? Just so I'm not making any assumptions here, there are the first set of screws on either side of the pocket, and underneath those are the actual set screws that move the t-block. Are these tightened all the way up against the t-block on both sides?


----------



## Vittorio

In any ILF bow, there are 3 dimentions only that may give problems in lateral paly during use of the bow (if align system is stable and locked) 

1) the U width in relationship to bolt diameter, if diffeence is more than 0.1 mm (U larger than bolt) you may have some problems that are usually fitted by a piece adhesive tape inside the U
2) the distance between the center of the U round and the cneter of the detent bolt on limbs, in relationship to same distance on parcatical condition of use ion riser
3) a very large slot in the align plate with round final part >> 11.00 mm in diameter (very seldom) 

The lateral stability of the ILF detent bolt is assured by the fact that it should seat in the round part of the align plate at he beginning and if is there , will return there perfectly after each shot. If not, problem 2 above, it means that limbs and riser have different distncies, that may happen mixing limbs and risers from different makers. Very difficult this to be your case.

The pin in the detent is there only to avoid the limbs to fall our when bow is unstrung, it has no practical function than this. 

Thefore, your problem may only come from 1) above. Check U size and bolt size by a calliper to verify.


----------



## Dennis2581

Hey guys,



rjbishop said:


> The problem lies in the T-block, which is manufactured separately from the rest of the riser, so it is not the a problem with the riser itself. In which case, you are lucky because it is a small piece that can just be swapped out instead of having to send the whole riser back.


Maybe it is just the T-block but overall it is just the tip of the iceberg considering the milling errors in the cutouts, etc..





rjbishop said:


> Because it has to for limbs to have lateral adjustment. I don't understand what you mean by the limb needs the "support of the pocket". If the edges of the pocket fully enclosed the limb, you wouldn't be able to adjust them left or right.
> 
> The excessive play is coming from the slot in the t-block being too large.


The limb (alignment cylinder) needs the support of the side walls of the limb pocket/t-block, the spring-loaded pin won't line up the limb, that's what I wanted to say





rjbishop said:


> This almost makes me think the t-block may actually be fine and is actually physically moving. It's hard to believe that much play exists. Are you positive the screws on either side of the limb pockets are tightened down? Just so I'm not making any assumptions here, there are the first set of screws on either side of the pocket, and underneath those are the actual set screws that move the t-block. Are these tightened all the way up against the t-block on both sides?


The T-block is secured safely and does't move (locked with the counter bolts, etc..)


----------



## Dennis2581

Hi,

Here's a little follow up video. It's a bit hard to use the caliper one-handed while filming but it should be visible that there is a difference in the dimensions. More importantly, you will see at the end of the video how much the limbs are moving in the pocket and how much that is on the tip. 

I'm aware about the problem now. Th point is, that I'm shocked that something like that exists. Having a technical background allows me to question such things and looking a bit deeper into the topic. I trusted the riser and never assumed such bad fitting. I don't want to imagine a person shooting this setup believing to have an accurate combo and blaming themself for a super inaccurate shooting. (I'm not talking about the 8 ring, I'm talking about the 2 or 3 ring). My 15 year old Aerotec (which I sadly just sold 3 weeks ago) was shooting super accurate and without any issues. (Common mistakes ended up in the 8 or maybe 7 ring with a good but not superb tuned bow).

So if you are considering such a riser, check these parts and the over-all quality.

Cheers,
Dennis


----------



## Dennis2581

Vittorio said:


> 1) the U width in relationship to bolt diameter, if diffeence is more than 0.1 mm (U larger than bolt) you may have some problems that are usually fitted by a piece adhesive tape inside the U
> 2) the distance between the center of the U round and the cneter of the detent bolt on limbs, in relationship to same distance on parcatical condition of use ion riser
> 3) a very large slot in the align plate with round final part >> 11.00 mm in diameter (very seldom)


Vittorio, 

Sorry, I was half asleep this morning

The first thing I checked was how the U of the limb sits on the limb bolt, which is just perfect. A tight sit and no play at all. The movement starts around the bin ob the limbs which would lead to case 3 of your post.


----------



## Gregjlongbow

I’m not an engineer, but I have to agree with the OP’s feelings on this. That seems like a lot of play for an ultra high end riser, AND for limbs of the same manufacturer. I could understand if you were using two different limbs, although even that is perfectly normal and gives us good tolerances, I would not expect that much. On my Xceed with both Zest and NS limbs there is extremely limited movement any direction when the limb is unstrung. I hope they tighten that up. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## theminoritydude

Well there is a kind of ‘solution’ to this. It’s not been proven in any way, it’s just something I’ve been playing around in my head for a bit, you may try it at your own risk.

The lateral stability of the limbs seated in the pocket is a result of the tight fit of the limb and the limb bolt, and the dovetail slot.....but I am suggesting that while strung up, the compression derived from the limbs themselves actually forces the dovetail to sit at the bottom of the slot, which in theory is a single point, hence a fixed position. Therefore, it shouldn’t move. But that’s just mathematical theory. 









You see, one of these bad boys probably costs around $20. You could file a V groove at the bottom to Ensure the fixed resting position remains, fixed. That way you won’t have a white elephant that you’d have to feed but nobody wants to ride on it because of the pandemic.


----------



## Dennis2581

@theminoritydude

In theory it makes sense. BUT the limb does get more pulled to the back and less down into the pocket. There should be way more force and friction pushing against the T block (in the direction of the top stabilizer pushing if you will) than rubbing on this single point of the circle. And since the grove and circle in this T-block is obviously larger than the cylinder of the limb, this "limb cylinder" rests on one point "symmetrical" and in line with the U-cutout. Due to the fact that the radius of the t-block is larger, the "limb-cylinder" is able to move sideways while just working against just a tiny little bit of friction due to the raising "slope" of the larger radius... so theoretically it is not possible but in reality just a tiny little amount of sideways force would be necessary to get the limb out of line. (finger release for example)

If the grove in the t-block would be a V-shape, the cylinder of the limb would be supported sideways (on one pint each side) BUT the distance how far the limb sits in the pocket would be variating depending on how far the limbs are tillered in or out (the shape of the limb's cylinder variates if pivoted (if you look on the bow from the side)). If the limbs are tillered differently the V-shape would push the limb out of the pocket or let it further in, depending on the direction the tiller bolts are adjusted. 

Bottom line: the "limb cylinder" needs a proper support from the T-block's parallel side walls, the lowest point of the limb pocket (the radius of the t-block) can only guaranty the the limb is all the way in and actually needs to be either a radius or or totally flat (which is not possible if you use a milling cutter to machine this section).

I struggled a bit with the language barrier, so I hope my "explanation" makes sense. If not, please let me know and I'll to explain the theory with some drawings or a video. 


Also, I'm usually willing to experiment different things but after this several month long journey of setup failures and considering the price point of this riser, I'm not willing to spent a single cent or extra minute on this riser. I'm running a business myself and if on of my customers is spending such an amount on one of my products (or less, obviously), he/she can expect a proper working product. In the rarer case mistakes happen, I'll do everything and show the best support possible in order to fix it. That's a proper way if you are in direct contact with customers doing direct business 1:1, but since W&W is a major brand and obviously not able to offer such a support platform, they should at least take care that no failed product leaves the manufacturer's workshop. 

Best regards
Dennis


----------



## GoldArcher403

Something here just doesnt add up.

The spring button in the limb has a flange at the end that keeps it in the slot in the T-block. If that much slop existed, the flange on the spring button wouldn't be able to grab the edges of the slot and you would be able to pull the limb vertically straight out of the pocket. Are you able to do that?

If not, I suspect the block is in reality, moving.

Your calipers are also blurry in that video. Post the readout and I can cross check against my riser and confirm if the t-block is out of spec. Measure at least three times and take the average.


----------



## Gregjlongbow

rjbishop said:


> Something here just doesnt add up.
> 
> The spring button in the limb has a flange at the end that keeps it in the slot in the T-block. If that much slop existed, the flange on the spring button wouldn't be able to grab the edges of the slot and you would be able to pull the limb vertically straight out of the pocket. Are you able to do that?
> 
> If not, I suspect the block is in reality, moving.


That’s what I thought. I wonder if he is turning the superficial set screws instead of the actual adjustment set screws. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Dennis2581

Guys, I'm not that silly....

Obviously I have removed the set screws to get to the actual screws of the t-block adjustment... These screws are countered against each other (similar concept as tiller bolts, obviously). After that was done I've put the set screws back in place... THE T-BLOCK IS NOT MOVING


----------



## Dennis2581

rjbishop said:


> Something here just doesnt add up.
> 
> The spring button in the limb has a flange at the end that keeps it in the slot in the T-block. If that much slop existed, the flange on the spring button wouldn't be able to grab the edges of the slot and you would be able to pull the limb vertically straight out of the pocket. Are you able to do that?


Exactly, that's the case


----------



## GoldArcher403

Dennis2581 said:


> Guys, I'm not that silly....
> 
> Obviously I have removed the set screws to get to the actual screws of the t-block adjustment... These screws are countered against each other (similar concept as tiller bolts, obviously). After that was done I've put the set screws back in place... THE T-BLOCK IS NOT MOVING


But can you pull the limb vertically out of the pocket? If the slot is too large, that spring button wouldn't be able to grab and stay in the pocket. That flange is only 1mm wider than the diameter of the spring button. You said earlier you had 1.5-2mm of slop. If thats the case, the limb should slide out of the pocket from the top.

Post the readout from your caliper measurement so I can cross check.


----------



## Dennis2581

On the top corner of my riser it sums up to probably 1mm (I was just looking on the limb moving and guessing based on that), if I take the caliper it shows me a difference between the grove and the limb cylinder of about 0.3-0.4mm which is already quite a lot in the world of CNC machining. 
And since I'm able to get the limbs out of line just by stringing the bow and shooting or with my bare hands it's just not acceptable.. I'm currently uploading another video, please give me a few minutes.


----------



## theminoritydude

"If the grove in the t-block would be a V-shape, the cylinder of the limb would be supported sideways (on one pint each side) BUT the distance how far the limb sits in the pocket would be variating depending on how far the limbs are tillered in or out (the shape of the limb's cylinder variates if pivoted (if you look on the bow from the side)). If the limbs are tillered differently the V-shape would push the limb out of the pocket or let it further in, depending on the direction the tiller bolts are adjusted."

Firstly, how far the limb sits already directly affects the sitting depth of the dovetail cylinder section in the slot in any normal configuration. In fact, due to the location of the pivot point of the limb against the T-block, a 'V' groove would actually reduce the sitting position range by shifting the original single contact point into two contact points, towards the pivot point. Second, your concerns about how far in the limb would go into the pocket is addressed by A) The gap between the stem of the limb bolt and the U shape of the limb butt, which at minimum distance is at least 2-3mm, and B) Any adjustments to the limb bolt would have very negligible changes due to the largely perpendicular directions of the two parameters in question. I mean, I'd be very happy to try this myself but (ok, i have a bag of these T-bolts, wife is a dealer)......I would prefer someone else going through the trouble instead of me pissing me wife off. What I COULD do, is file to increase the gap of the slot so it is a positively loose fit with the dovetail, and give it a V grove with an angular file. If I ever do something stupid, I'll post the results.


----------



## Dennis2581

Video should be online in a minute


----------



## Timevoid

I got 3 WNS limbs and and one WNS riser by same company. All limbs wiggle in the limb pocket when limbs are unstrung, messured its like 0.3mm with digital calipers. 
The issue is the Seating of the surfaces of the limb and the metall pocket in a 45 degree angle.

Because the 45-degree angles meet and they self align to the center of the block. Thats because both limb button and pocket has undamaged flat 45-degree surfaces that match. 
Worn equipment or mismatch in ILF-components should be able to cause seating issues like picture below.


----------



## Timevoid

Im a bit confused by wording of some posts. "T-block", a t-block cannot self align itself to the center. It will always be some sideways movement. Depends on machining tolerences ofc. 
Maybe its just a expression. 

just another ugly illustration to why i disagree on t-block description


----------



## Seattlepop

Dennis2581 said:


> Video should be online in a minute


You are measuring one point on a tapered slot. If you move the calipers closer to the where the limb would be bedded, you would get tighter tolerances.

For fun, I just checked four risers including W&W and only one had zero play UNSTRUNG. I suspect that is because of the particular limb set I have on it. I won't bother to check other limbs because I would expect there to be some play UNSTRUNG just due to mfr tolerances. This is normal imho. The tapered limb bushing slot on the riser causes the limb to self-center (seats itself) when under tension. I think you are mistaken when you say the tension is outward (if I understood your statement), rather it is inward toward the riser and this why when STRUNG your limbs should have no lateral movement. There would be increased tension while drawing the bow, further pulling the limb into limb block center. 

I'm afraid I can't understand what the issue was in the alignment portion of the first video, but the squeaking noise might be helped by string wax in and around the U-slot of the limb butt. 

FWIW


----------



## GoldArcher403

Timevoid said:


> Im a bit confused by wording of some posts. "T-block", a t-block cannot self align itself to the center. It will always be some sideways movement. Depends on machining tolerences ofc.
> Maybe its just a expression.
> 
> just another ugly illustration to why i disagree on t-block description
> 
> View attachment 7181409


When I say T-block I am describing the entire apparatus the limb slides into. Not the geometry of the slot.


----------



## Vittorio

theminoritydude said:


> .......
> The lateral stability of the limbs seated in the pocket is a result of the tight fit of the limb and the limb bolt, and the dovetail slot.....but I am suggesting that while strung up, the compression derived from the limbs themselves actually forces the dovetail to sit at the bottom of the slot, which in theory is a single point, hence a fixed position. Therefore, it shouldn’t move. But that’s just mathematical theory.


Exactly what I mentioend on my point 3).
When strung, the limb will ever seat in the center of the 2 radiouses connection, apart fromm a very very bad almost flat instead of round final inner part of the align plate. 
So, if the end of the slot is round AND the dovetail pin is in contact with that part, limbs wil never move laterally when shooting 

This is the magic of the ILF system ...


----------



## bahboric

I am confused, and in posting this will probably just be displaying my complete inability to understand what is going on in the limb pocket. But, when I look at the right diagram Timevoid posted, I thought forces on the strung bow would be pushing the dovetail down, instead of up, and thus stringing the bow would leave a gap between the two dovetails. What I mean is that if the force on the limbs are down at that point, the 45 degree surfaces won't be pushed together, but apart. When I look at the limbs on my Hoyt Epik riser, which has two "pro series limb adjustment dowels", I see two marks on the limbs where the adjustment dowels hit. I think, when strung, all the force is on those two spots to the side of the dovetail, and when I look with a flashlight at the limb pocket when strung, it seems the 45 degree surfaces aren't touching. Now, if the limbs were strung backwards, the two 45 degree surfaces would be forced together, but I don't see how that is happening when strung normally. 

I may be completely confused about the forces in the limb pocket, but I'd like a simple explanation as to why, in Timevoid's diagram, the "force from the stringed limbs forces it to center itself in the seating." I would have thought the force would have the opposite effect.


----------



## Dennis2581

Guys, 

The limb cylinder touches the the t-block only on its side walls. The limb is bent between the tiller bolts and the rounded surface of the t-block. So the theory that the limb cylinder and its 45° surface gets pushed against a 45° surface on the T-block (which is not there) is incorrect. Have a look from the side while the bow is under tension. the u-grove of the limb presses against the tiller bolt while the surface of the limb is resting on the surface of the t-block (with the carbon material and not the limb cylinder)


----------



## Dennis2581

The only purpose of the undercut in the T-block is to prevent the limbs from falling over and out then the bow is unstrung. 

Have a look at the pressure points and the direction of force of F1 and F2 (hope you can ready my hand writing)

I hope this drawing makes sense.


----------



## Dennis2581

Timevoid said:


> Im a bit confused by wording of some posts. "T-block", a t-block cannot self align itself to the center. It will always be some sideways movement. Depends on machining tolerences ofc.
> Maybe its just a expression.
> 
> just another ugly illustration to why i disagree on t-block description
> 
> View attachment 7181409


Take a closer look on your T-block, it is one ;-)
As shown in my silly sketch above there is physically no option for the 45° surface of the limb cylinder to touch a potential 45° surface within the t-blocks (which is also not machined).
The only purpose of this step in the limb cylinders and the 45° surface is to prevent them from falling out when attaching the limbs and string. 

I'm happy to be proved wrong, just show my a "t-block" with a 45° undercut AND that is able to let the limb cylinder's 45° surface rest on it (which would make a tiller bolt obsolete btw)




bahboric said:


> I thought forces on the strung bow would be pushing the dovetail down, instead of up, and thus stringing the bow would leave a gap between the two dovetails.


exactly that's the case


----------



## Dennis2581

Seattlepop said:


> You are measuring one point on a tapered slot. If you move the calipers closer to the where the limb would be bedded, you would get tighter tolerances.


I'm measuring at the lowest point of the actual width (before the radius starts). If it actually would be tapered, I would not be able to force the limbs out of position. If the Vittorio (which makes sense in the first place but not if you are looking deeper into), 

Attached are two sketches looking at the T-block from the top, one shows a U shaped T-block-grove (as it is always the case) which is fairly larger than the actual limb cylinder. The other one shows the concept of a V-slot (as mentioned my theminoritydude) which would prevent any sideways travel due to a dramatic gain of height (on the 45° slope) when the limb cylinder would be pushed out of line. On the other hand there is less height or gain in material on the left example (radius=width of grove) if the limb is getting pushed sideways.


----------



## theminoritydude

Dennis2581 said:


> ..... the u-grove of the limb presses against the tiller bolt......


No it doesn’t.


----------



## Dennis2581

theminoritydude said:


> No it doesn’t.


Yes it does! Maybe I have not used the right words to describe it. The U-grove is not pushing against the shaft of the tiller bolt but the plane surface of the limb (not the u-grove) presses against the flat surface of the tiller bolt, see my first sketch (10:17PM) and force direction F1. 

I'm not talking about the force direction that goes though the riser from top to bottom (which presses the limb cylinder into the t-block).

The Limb is pivoting around the point where it rests on the riser (on the var end) the only thing that is preventing the limb from "collapsing" (from the force of the string) are the tiller bolts and its surface.


----------



## theminoritydude

Dennis2581 said:


> The Limb is pivoting around the point where it rests on the riser (on the var end) the only thing that is preventing the limb from "collapsing" (from the force of the string) are the tiller bolts and its surface.


The cylinder of the dovetail is pressing on the bottom slot of the T-bracket with the same force as the string tension when measured in the same direction as the string’s axis.


----------



## Metropolis

Dennis, Have you tried to move the limb with a hammer ?
I think the tip could move 10mm instead of only 6-7...

Seriously is there a difference before and after 200 arrows ?
(Have you shot any arrow with that bow ?)
Have you check a difference on 3 or 4 practice sessions ?

Because "theory" in archery...


----------



## Dennis2581

Metropolis said:


> Dennis, Have you tried to move the limb with a hammer ?
> I think the tip could move 10mm instead of only 6-7...
> 
> Seriously is there a difference before and after 200 arrows ?
> (Have you shot any arrow with that bow ?)
> Have you check a difference on 3 or 4 practice sessions ?
> 
> Because "theory" in archery...


Please watch the first video, I am shooting the riser for a few months now and trying to tune it properly (unlike my old Aerotec it shows different results every single time). 

And yes, the limbs are moving from arrow to arrow and my center shot/string alignment is drifting.


----------



## theminoritydude

Did you adjust the limb alignment while the bow was strung? If you did, did you unload it, then string it up again before you checked the alignment?


----------



## Dennis2581

theminoritydude said:


> Did you adjust the limb alignment while the bow was strung? If you did, did you unload it, then string it up again before you checked the alignment?


No, I didn't. I'm not a fan of moving screws while there's intense pressure on parts. I measured, unstrung the bow, adjusted, strung the bow, measured again, unstrung...




theminoritydude said:


> The cylinder of the dovetail is pressing on the bottom slot of the T-bracket with the same force as the string tension when measured in the same direction as the string’s axis.


No, it doesn't the limb rests on the surface behind the T-block (see sketch of post #29). there's actually no additional pressure (besides the spring-loaded pin) on the "dovetail" (it's still just a t-slot and straight cyilnder)-cylinder.


Honestly, I feel to justify myself all the time. Isn't the situation and the problem not that obvious?


----------



## theminoritydude

Vittorio designs, and markets his own risers.


----------



## Dennis2581

theminoritydude said:


> Vittorio designs, and markets his own risers.


I'm aware of that. The wife of the club member I borrowed a set of limbs to double-check has a Gillo (G1 I believe) and the limbs have no lateral movement at all. The TFT riser of the mentioned club member shows a bit of lateral play (by far not that much as my ATF-X)


----------



## theminoritydude

Vittorio said:


> Exactly what I mentioend on my point 3).
> When strung, the limb will ever seat in the center of the 2 radiouses connection, apart fromm a very very bad almost flat instead of round final inner part of the align plate.
> So, if the end of the slot is round AND the dovetail pin is in contact with that part, limbs wil never move laterally when shooting
> 
> This is the magic of the ILF system ...


^^^


----------



## Dennis2581

theminoritydude said:


> ^^^


see the sketch of post 31, if the grove and its radius is bigger than the actual dovetail cylinder radius, lateral play is possible even under tension. If the fit is tight, no doubt that it would be solid. I'm not questioning the concept of an ILF system in general but if the tolerances are that off (as it is in my case), it ends up in a super inaccurate setup.


----------



## theminoritydude

Dennis2581 said:


> there's actually no additional pressure (besides the spring-loaded pin) on the "dovetail" (it's still just a t-slot and straight cyilnder)-cylinder.


I was referring to (and disagreeing with) what you said here.


----------



## Dennis2581

theminoritydude said:


> I was referring to (and disagreeing with) what you said here.


probably there is some sort of language barrier. I was not referring to the force when the radius surface of the dovetail cylinder is pressing against the radius surface of the t-slot. I was referring to the flat surface of the dovetail cylinder (where the pin sticks out) pressing (or as it is the case, not pressing) against the bottom ground in the t-slot. (in the direction force direction the string is pulled)


----------



## Dennis2581

I think I've said enough here... and yes, it has become frustrating showing or maybe warning others about these tolerance issues around the limb alignment and t-blocks. 
Believe me or not, I honestly don't care anymore and hope for a proper warranty solution. If people are willing to accept such a loose fit and lateral movement, go for it, it's not my f.. problem. But I won't accept it.

It's easy to follow the sheep (especially if it's a big one like W&W) instead of questioning it. (Yes, manufacturers can have issues with tolerances). The phase "is is a feature, not a bug" doesn't work all the time. It is a bug, period.

I think it's best for me to go back into reading mode here on archerytalk. 

Cheers


----------



## damiaan

can you also feel movement while the bow is strung? you can check this by placing your knee on the side of the limb pocket and pulling both riser and limb laterally, do this for both limbs and in both directions.
if the limbs shift you will feel/hear a slight pop. if the limbs do not move doing this test, they will also not move during shooting, if they do, it is a defect of either riser or limb. If you have another pair of limbs, put those in the riser and repeat the test. also do the same test with another riser. this way you should be able to determine where the fault lies and act accordingly.

(this test is also described in Simon Needham's book: The art of repetition)


----------



## UK_Stretch

Did anyone actually watch the video? I see lots of hypothesis on why Dennis must be mistaken but look at the video. What he clearly shows should not happen. A bow that has been shot in should not be doing this. If the magic of the ILF system was working then what he shows in the video would not be possible. You had me convinced at “limbs creaking” through the clicker, there is a late stage movement. I would have liked to see you pluck the string firmly after pushing the limb out of alignment just to show that the limb stays moved but I believe what you say.

Just for a sanity check I just did this with my Xi and it didn’t move at all.

Dennis, I feel for you as I have been through something similar in 1998 with a Hoyt Avalon Plus. Different cause but same type of results. Hopefully you will get a satisfactory resolution through your dealer. Yes I do believe there is a fault with the riser.

Good luck

Stretch


----------



## Dennis2581

damiaan said:


> can you also feel movement while the bow is strung?



Yes



damiaan said:


> If you have another pair of limbs, put those in the riser and repeat the test.


We did "dry check" another set of limbs at the club on Saturday. They had an equal amount of play while they had a tiny little bit but not much play in his TFT riser. Also my NS limbs didn't show much more or much play in his TFT riser (especially compared to my ATF-X).

It's not only the limb pockets (that's the most significant one and the technical most relevant one), Just pay attention to all those steps and edges (these corners are sharp!)inside the cutouts (these steps are also not equal on every hole and every surface). It looks like the riser was misaligned a few times will milling those cutouts from both sides. With powder coating it is a bit easier to hide such things but since the ATF-X is anodized you see everything.

I'm questioning the current over-all quality of a riser retailing at about 950USD here in Europe...


----------



## Dennis2581

UK_Stretch said:


> Did anyone actually watch the video? I see lots of hypothesis on why Dennis must be mistaken but look at the video. What he clearly shows should not happen. A bow that has been shot in should not be doing this. If the magic of the ILF system was working then what he shows in the video would not be possible. You had me convinced at “limbs creaking” through the clicker, there is a late stage movement. I would have liked to see you pluck the string firmly after pushing the limb out of alignment just to show that the limb stays moved but I believe what you say.
> 
> Just for a sanity check I just did this with my Xi and it didn’t move at all.
> 
> Dennis, I feel for you as I have been through something similar in 1998 with a Hoyt Avalon Plus. Different cause but same type of results. Hopefully you will get a satisfactory resolution through your dealer. Yes I do believe there is a fault with the riser.
> 
> Good luck
> 
> Stretch


Thank you for the support, Stretch!

I don't want to force this problem and let this riser shine in a bad light on purpose (I have chosen this riser consciously based on look, features and especially how it feels in my hand, and payed a decent amount of money for it). I tried a few things to get it in line and if you're spending 3h+ with limb alignment (because every time i stringed the bow I was either over or undershooting the middle - obviously I pulled the string each time to let the limbs "sit" properly - just to notice that the alignment was was off again down at the club. Exactly this was the point where I started looking deeper into the whole thing and started questioning the construction (or let's say its tolerances).


----------



## theminoritydude

Dennis2581 said:


> probably there is some sort of language barrier. I was not referring to the force when the radius surface of the dovetail cylinder is pressing against the radius surface of the t-slot. I was referring to the flat surface of the dovetail cylinder (where the pin sticks out) pressing (or as it is the case, not pressing) against the bottom ground in the t-slot. (in the direction force direction the string is pulled)


Oh. Of course that’s not pressing. There’s a a range allowed for the tiller settings, it differed from brand to brand. But your investigations lead you to believe that the problem is that of a tolerance issue with the T-bracket. I’ve already provided the solution/suggestion in the form of a V groove. And if that doesn’t do the job, the problem is not with the slot (nor the tolerance since it’s probably not the function of the parallel sides to maintain the limb alignment, but rather the bottom radius of the slot).


----------



## Dennis2581

theminoritydude said:


> the problem is not with the slot (nor the tolerance since it’s probably not the function of the parallel sides to maintain the limb alignment, but rather the bottom radius of the slot).


Both distances are in relation with each other. If the distance between the parallel sides would be correct, the radius would be also tight enough to prevent any movement. (so lateral force can be handled by the parallel sides as well as the radius). If the distance between the parallel sides is too big, it also results in a bigger radius (the radius is tangential to the straight sides) and will end up allowing almost the same amount of lateral play than the bare side walls. 

As I said, the issue is in the t-blocks. Call me stubborn, but I won't start filing and retrofitting stuff on a "brand new" 950$ riser just in order to get it working properly. I could machine my own pockets but why should I spent even more time and money on a faulty product.


----------



## UK_Stretch

Advising someone to invalidate their warranty on a brand new and likely faulty bit of very expensive equipment seems, to be frank, like pretty crappy advice.

As Dennis lives in a country with consumer protection he should seek resolution from his dealer and get a replacement item that is fit for purpose. 

Stretch


----------



## Timevoid

There is no guarantee ilf will fit between brands or even between the same brand, Steven showed that with Fivics risers and limbs.

so buying a new riser or limb make sure to follow manufacturers recommendation or you on your own trying to claim "consumer rights".


----------



## tassie_devil

UK_Stretch said:


> Advising someone to invalidate their warranty on a brand new and likely faulty bit of very expensive equipment seems, to be frank, like pretty crappy advice.
> 
> As Dennis lives in a country with consumer protection he should seek resolution from his dealer and get a replacement item that is fit for purpose.
> 
> Stretch


^^ This. There is definitely a problem with that riser and your frustration is warranted. I don’t think the “feature not a bug” principle fits because it would appear to be a faulty one-off not a design flaw. If it was me I would just return my premium product for a replacement. I would fully expect W&W to back their product. The forum is not littered with ATF-X disaster stories so you are probably the unlucky soul who got a rare dud from an otherwise reputable company. Even the best brands have failures, albeit rare, but the good companies are happy to back their product. Good luck with it.


----------



## tooold

I just received the exact same riser 2 weeks ago - haven't shot it yet - fingers crossed!


----------



## UK_Stretch

<Replying to Timevoid> May be so but he is shooting W&W limbs so not relevant.

Equally, if the manufacturer lists ILF in the bow spec then you’ll win a case if your prepared to go to court (at least in most European courts). They would have to prove that your limb is off spec and as there is no spec they’d have a hard time. Which may be why Hoyt is using HDS nowadays. (Equally they could just be making a point).

Some dealers are very anti mix and match because they can’t be bothered with the hassle. And yup it is a hassle in some cases, cheap w&w/SF limbs can be a terrible fit in cheap Hoyt risers for example. Equally, I have some dirt cheap Krossen limbs in an old Hoyt Elan and it is fine.

Stretch


----------



## Vittorio

Anyhow, simplest way to chech if really the problem is the dovetail align plate with too much play to the limb detent, is to use the old solution of a thin stripe of aluminium can (Coke can usually be perfect for this) aorund the the final round part of the align plate. This decreases the diamete of said part by around 0.2 mm . Limbs when inserted will fit very tight, and you should be able to shoot your riser without any lateral movemnt of the limbs shot after shot. Then if the shim solves, you may think to go to claim for warrnty replacement of the align plates . 

Coke can stripes are the most valid solution to all mix and match probelms for ILF systems and of course for 3d axis torsional problems for limbs to risers contacts. One of the infinite valid reasons to drink Coke ...


----------



## UK_Stretch

Vittorio said:


> Coke can stripes are the most valid solution to all mix and match probelms for ILF systems and of course for 3d axis torsional problems for limbs to risers contacts. One of the infinite valid reasons to drink Coke ...


We used beer cans but hey, we’re Scottish :beer::tongue:

However, I’ve seen an issue with SF limbs in a Hoyt Horizon riser where the limb butt is so deep there is no available adjustment for tiller/weight. The butt wedges from the dovetail and does not move with the adjuster. 

Stretch


----------



## theminoritydude

UK_Stretch said:


> Advising someone to invalidate their warranty on a brand new and likely faulty bit of very expensive equipment seems, to be frank, like pretty crappy advice.
> 
> As Dennis lives in a country with consumer protection he should seek resolution from his dealer and get a replacement item that is fit for purpose.
> 
> Stretch


I've already singled out that $20 piece of T-bracket. He has the option to try it, nothing has been hidden from him, and I haven't misled anyone. He is a grown man. The 'crappy advice' was out of consideration of his frustrations, partly due to the fact that he hasn't exercised his consumer rights to return the item.

I have plenty more of those crappy tricks up my sleeves, including one where I shot without an arrow rest. For 5 years. Outrageous and reckless. 3 other fools adopted the method, one of them shot 330 at 70m. The last time I checked with the female coach from LH team (South Korea), she didn't protest. I intend to push the envelope.


----------



## theminoritydude

Vittorio said:


> Anyhow, simplest way to chech if really the problem is the dovetail align plate with too much play to the limb detent, is to use the old solution of a thin stripe of aluminium can (Coke can usually be perfect for this) aorund the the final round part of the align plate. This decreases the diamete of said part by around 0.2 mm . Limbs when inserted will fit very tight, and you should be able to shoot your riser without any lateral movemnt of the limbs shot after shot. Then if the shim solves, you may think to go to claim for warrnty replacement of the align plates .
> 
> Coke can stripes are the most valid solution to all mix and match probelms for ILF systems and of course for 3d axis torsional problems for limbs to risers contacts. One of the infinite valid reasons to drink Coke ...


We used the pull tabs from the old cans on our M16A2 and M16A3 so that the upper and lower receiver didn't rattle.


----------



## UK_Stretch

theminoritydude said:


> I have plenty more of those crappy tricks up my sleeves....


Your missing the point completely. When someone has a brand new bow that does not perform what should they do:

Option 1: modify the bow and invalidate warranty
Option 2: send it back to the dealer

Any advice other than 2 is erroneous.

Talking to someone about their problems is about helping them find a path out of the problem, not an opportunity for you to show how much **** you know/how clever you are. Yup your advice would’ve been good if the riser was 3 years old bought off eBay.

Have a nice life being terribly clever and drastically unhelpful.

Stretch


----------



## theminoritydude

........does this mean you're not going to try some of those ideas? You only live once.


----------



## theminoritydude

UK_Stretch said:


> ...... not an opportunity for you to show how much **** you know/how clever you are. Yup your advice would’ve been good if the riser was 3 years old.....


Thank you.


----------



## UK_Stretch

Arrogance is the camouflage of insecurity.


----------



## GoldArcher403

I feel like any advice we give here is moot. 

His only option is to warranty the bow. There is no DIY fix for a problem like this.


----------



## Vittorio

UK_Stretch said:


> We used beer cans but hey, we’re Scottish :beer::tongue:
> 
> However, I’ve seen an issue with SF limbs in a Hoyt Horizon riser where the limb butt is so deep there is no available adjustment for tiller/weight. The butt wedges from the dovetail and does not move with the adjuster.
> 
> Stretch


Alchool forbidden in archery, so Cole only !!:darkbeer::darkbeer::darkbeer:!!

The most stupid thing in archery is the absence of real published standards, even for the most simple, common parts. The bows reach a kind of standard just copying and interpretating previously existing solutions, but no one cares if something is "slightly" different. 
For instance, the plugers have reached in years a practical standard were outside is 5/16-24, so the holes in rises are tapped same, and the inner pin is 4.2 mm in diameter. At tha beginning, the ouside was M8 or 5/16, but "market" went to 5/16.
Inner pin had different sizes, but now you have it at 4.2 mm and pins are interchangeable between Beiter, Cartel, Delpa, Best and many other plungers .... withour anyone stating that 4.2 had to be the diameter. But what about making a pin 4.1 as maller hole in the plunger? Or making M10 plungers and risers with corrspondant holes? Or finally defining what should be the minimum distance between the 2 plunger holes ? Everything tends to converge to the "standard" sizes, for easier sales, but simply those standard do not exist and can change any moment ... 
P.S. by Bernardini risers had 2 x M5 tapped holes for sight, we were selling them with 2 x M5 screws to help customers, no one complained, never ...


----------



## lksseven

Small Cokes are the bomb!


----------



## theminoritydude

So any OP, we gave W&W a call an hour ago and they’ve stated that as long as the main body of the riser is not damaged, any modifications to the T-block (as long as it doesn’t alter the main riser body in any manner) does not void the warranty.


----------



## Seattlepop

^
Nice to know I suppose, but it would have been more useful to know about the acceptable tolerances for that piece and whether they would send the OP replacements.


----------



## John_K

Vittorio said:


> P.S. by Bernardini risers had 2 x M5 tapped holes for sight, we were selling them with 2 x M5 screws to help customers, no one complained, never ...


This was why I got my first Luxor for a bargain: the previous owner had used standard thread screws to mount his sight :mg: He'd got them in, but taking them out with a hand drill made quite a mess, and one got stuck.

Luckily Sid at Border was able to drill out some new holes and glue some arrow inserts in. Necessity is the mother of invention  Worked perfectly, and the person I sold the riser on to a few years later didn't have any problems either.


----------



## Dennis2581

Seattlepop said:


> ^
> Nice to know I suppose, but it would have been more useful to know about the acceptable tolerances for that piece and whether they would send the OP replacements.


Indeed, If theminoritydude has already a wire to W&W it would be great to know how they handle tolerances in their risers and if this is something to expect ;-)

I wrote an email to W&W with some pictures and a few videos on Saturday. I got a reply on Sunday asking for a contact address / phone number and where I bought the riser. 
They said they will look through the footage and getting back to me shortly. 
My local dealer (he's sharing my opinion) has also reached out to the distributor for AT/EU and is also waiting for any reply. 

I'll keep you updated (if there's any interest..)


----------



## Timevoid

Just to cheer everyone up with some laghter about ILF fitment. If feel sorry for shops trying to push products that's all over the place  

Keep up those bloopers Steven. 

Magic starts at 5:00 and the struggle continues for 10min 





Action starts at 0:40 and the struggle starts.


----------



## theminoritydude

Question: How do you know I actually called W&W? What if I was the guy Alfred was describing to Bruce Wayne?


----------



## UK_Stretch

Vittorio said:


> The most stupid thing in archery is the absence of real published standards, even for the most simple, common parts.


Yup, there are a few people who give it a close run though.

Many manufacturers don’t supply enough specification info with their risers. Even the simple size of screw using in a sight block. Drives me nuts that bow makers don’t supply a set of 10-24 in the holes (where 10-24 is the right thread of course!) The spec sheet shipped with the riser should explicitly state all thread sizes, Allen key sizes etc.

Stretch


----------



## tassie_devil

Timevoid said:


> Just to cheer everyone up with some laghter about ILF fitment. If feel sorry for shops trying to push products that's all over the place
> 
> Keep up those bloopers Steven.
> 
> Magic starts at 5:00 and the struggle continues for 10min


Steve’s great - you will definitely get an honest review, “Does it do your head in? It does my head in” and “some limbs fit, some limbs don’t”. Classic.


----------



## Metropolis

Dennis2581 said:


> I'll keep you updated (if there's any interest..)


Of course, we are curious to hear from them, 
also because some of the greatest archers are shooting this riser (Ryoo Su Jung, Lee Woo Seok).

For infos I checked some gear today :
- AXT + Wiawis One : nothing,
- AXT + NS : nothing,
- Radian + Wiawis One : nothing, 
- Radian + NS : very few rotation on Y axis.


----------



## Vittorio

UK_Stretch said:


> Yup, there are a few people who give it a close run though.
> 
> Many manufacturers don’t supply enough specification info with their risers. Even the simple size of screw using in a sight block. Drives me nuts that bow makers don’t supply a set of 10-24 in the holes (where 10-24 is the right thread of course!) The spec sheet shipped with the riser should explicitly state all thread sizes, Allen key sizes etc.
> 
> Stretch


Stretch, the reason NOT to supply the screws for the sight with the riser is that also the sight mounting blocks don't have any standard as far as their heigh is concerned.... so what lenght of screws? I went to explore this, and made a kit availble to customers as spare part, but I had to include 2 x 4 different lenghts of 10-24 screws in it, and I'm pretty sure that they don't cover 100% of mounting blocks existing ...


----------



## Dennis2581

theminoritydude said:


> Question: How do you know I actually called W&W? What if I was the guy Alfred was describing to Bruce Wayne?


Are we now on "don't feed the troll"?!



Metropolis said:


> Of course, we are curious to hear from them,
> also because some of the greatest archers are shooting this riser (Ryoo Su Jung, Lee Woo Seok).
> 
> For infos I checked some gear today :
> - AXT + Wiawis One : nothing,
> - AXT + NS : nothing,
> - Radian + Wiawis One : nothing,
> - Radian + NS : very few rotation on Y axis.


I'm assuming those pros don't get their risers shipped off the shelf ;-)

But thanks for checking your stuff, very interesting, indeed!


----------



## UK_Stretch

Vittorio said:


> Stretch, the reason NOT to supply the screws for the sight with the riser is that also the sight mounting blocks don't have any standard as far as their heigh is concerned...


But, the same length screws will give a satisfactory mount on Shibuya, Axcel, Arten, Spigarelli, AGF and many others. It also proves that your screw threads are clean and usable. As a buyer if you have a Halstein or Toxonics that need longer then at least you know “how much longer” (and hopefully you know what thread you are asking for because the manufacturer put it in the manual).

Sorry, I don’t agree that “they won’t fit all” is a good reason for not supplying $0.50 set of screws with a $900 riser. Especially when one set can fit 99%.

There’s another standard for your list 

Stretch


----------



## Vittorio

Stretch, the makers of sights know perectly that a problem exists, and they are supplying screws of the right lenght already with their the sights. No problem to adds sight screws to the riser, from the cost point of view, but I can only imagine how many will write us saying that screws provided are WRONG in lenght ... After a week were I have had people wanting to return a riser because "riser tiller was wrong", another mentioing that limbs were loose in the riser so they both risers and limbs were wrong , and other countless sometime absurd questions and claims, what I really don't want is to start a lot of debates about lenght of the screws for the "x" or "y" sight bocks...


----------



## theminoritydude

Dennis2581 said:


> Are we now on "don't feed the troll"?!


I sometimes feed the trolls, so I don't have to do the trolling myself.


----------



## UK_Stretch

Vittorio, I hear your pain. Unfortunately there seem to be a lot of people who can afford expensive equipment who are lacking in sense - so I understand the decision even if I don’t agree. I would settle for a handbook (paper or digital) that sets out the specs.

It is nice to see an OP who is a good example of someone who has done his homework before reaching his conclusion.

Stretch


----------



## lcaillo

theminoritydude said:


> I sometimes feed the trolls, so I don't have to do the trolling myself.


That would be trolling, IMNSHO. Actually, less excusable, in my mind, if you do it consciously. If I were running a forum you would not last long.


----------



## theminoritydude

Yeah but, you couldn’t tell when I was doing it because everyone does it. The only difference is that they don’t think that they are. The issue is how one views trolls; a very narrow way of defining it, is that anyone who disagrees with you, is a troll.

I didn’t make that phone call. I can’t speak korean. Me missus did. And I knew they were talking about it because I kept hearing “T-block”. LOL


----------



## theminoritydude

Hey Icaillo, have you thought about running this forum as an admin/mod?


----------



## damiaan

one of our local W&W shooters has the same problem, brand new bow, we had him test it based on Dennis' experience.
He has also sent W&W a message asking about this issue.

it might be that there is a bad batch of T-blocks going around


----------



## Dennis2581

Yesterday I had a bit of time to do some further testing based on the theories discussed here. 

I was shooting a couple of arrows and had a friend watching me (to double-check/spot any obvious mistakes from my side).

When I set up the bow and for the first 3 arrows, everything was more or less in line, and the bow quite silent and damped in the shot and follow-through.
On the fourth arrow, I noticed that it was "jumping" a bit out of the bow window, also it was louder and ended up in the lower 6 rings (a bit to the right). No obvious big mistake on my end as confirmed by the spotting friend. Checked the string alignment and it was off to the left (similar to damiaan's pictures). The next two arrows ended up around the same area of the 6 rings and the noise level remained significantly higher and less smooth. 

I decided to adjust the sight and shot the next 4 of arrows quite okay without any big changes.. (the arrow was always jumping a bit out of the window, probably due to the extreme center shot setting cused by the incorrect alignment). 
The 5th arrow was significantly smoother again, checked the limbs and there were a bit more back to normal (at least what I saw).. also the next arrow went out significantly smoother, with less of a jump. Interestingly, these two arrows landed around the 5 rings on the top left (quite close to each other).. Maybe a result of the sight compensation I did earlier.. 

So that's quite interesting and definitely (at least for me) some sort of proof that there's something absolutely not okay. 

I talked to my employee today (I'm running a small business for CNC machined drum pedal upgrades) about this stuff, who has a similar technical background but nothing to do with archery at all.

He mentioned a point, I never really thought about. The "T-block" or the grove for the limb cylinder in my Hoyt and other bows was always made from steel. The T-block of the W&W is just made from aluminum (which is way softer) which got an anodizing treatment (just regular anodizing, no hard anodizing). So it's basically just a matter of time until this t-block slot becomes lose intolerances (just by assembling the bow every single time the limb cylinder which is made from stainless steel, slides, and grinds in this pocket).

I'm at a point where I think this is a major design flow in general. No doubt, that people are shooting good scores with those risers (me included from time to time). But this is a very critical area that should remain stiff and well connected all the time, no matter what. 

I'm pretty sure that my warranty claim will take a while. So I've decided to spend a few evenings working on an improved version of this T-block with some sort of V-grove/radius combo. A 2-piece design made from aluminum and stainless steel, depending on the area. For me, the whole W&W story is over but I do want to test it and hope to help some fellow archer friends at the club and elsewhere who are shooting risers with those aluminum blocks not knowing that there's maybe something off, or developing to be off ;-)

I'll keep you updated about the warranty claim and my T-block idea (I have already something quite specific in mind and curious to see if that might work.. CAD will tell me more)

Cheers,
Dennis


----------



## Dennis2581

The current theoretical status of my T-block mod attempt. Two-piece construction with a geometrical tight support radius and a guarantee that the cylinder will not hit the middle (stays supported from two sides, always). 
The lower (bigger) piece can be aluminum while the top piece, made from stainless steel can be swapped out easily (trying different shapes and sizes and in the unexpected case of wear). A secure fit of this small top piece is provided by two screws and two dowel pins.


----------



## damiaan

Looks great!
couple of tips / pointers:
- I see you have a hole for the spring detent, but the straight walls of that hole will prevent you from getting your limbs out again. either use a shallow groove or nothing at all. The detent is only there to prevent your limbs from falling out while handling the bow unstrung.
- Your attachment method of both countersunk screws and dowel pins might over constrain your assembly, so you will have to make sure the tapped and countersunk holes line up really well or else the parts won't fit together properly
- Stainless and aluminium together will be subject to galvanic corrosion, if this is to be a long term solution for you, I would advise using either brass or steel that has a black oxide coating.


If you wanted to go really fancy you could incorporate a shimming system for the 'roll' of the limbs, similar to the newer Hoyt models.

maybe the part could be entirely out of a steel alloy, a little extra weight in the pockets might be a good thing

side note, I have asked around if people shooting the regular ATF have the same issue, and nobody had the problem with their ATF risers.


----------



## theminoritydude

What is the size of the screws?


----------



## Dennis2581

damiaan said:


> Looks great!
> couple of tips / pointers:
> - I see you have a hole for the spring detent, but the straight walls of that hole will prevent you from getting your limbs out again. either use a shallow groove or nothing at all. The detent is only there to prevent your limbs from falling out while handling the bow unstrung.


I thought about this in bed, you're absolutely right and I have already changed it to long hole grove in order to compensate different angles and positions of the spring-loaded pin.



damiaan said:


> - Your attachment method of both countersunk screws and dowel pins might over constrain your assembly, so you will have to make sure the tapped and countersunk holes line up really well or else the parts won't fit together properly


Don't worry, If I do it, i do it correctly ;-). Two 3h6 pins and two 3R7 holes for the pins in the main Block (for pressing them in) and two 3H6 holes in the stainless block to handle all forces. The socket head screws' purpose is only to keep those parts together. 



damiaan said:


> - Stainless and aluminum together will be subject to galvanic corrosion, if this is to be a long term solution for you, I would advise using either brass or steel that has a black oxide coating.


I'd go for some anodized aluminum (and usually some fine sandblasting) so galvanic corrosion is not an issue. But brass sounds like the way more fancy option ;-)
Thanks for the input!





theminoritydude said:


> What is the size of the screws?


I won't comment on your posts/questions anymore, appreciate all the help in previous posts...


----------



## theminoritydude

Because if you hadn’t incorporated a load bearing geometry between the top and bottom plates, your screws might shear.


----------



## Dennis2581

Some more background why the theory "if the radius of the pocket and the radius of the limb cylinder/dowel is the same, it will always line up and have lateral support".

This situation only claims to be true if the limb cylinder (as I'm referring to the part of the limb that slides into the grove in the riser) would be parallel to the T-block in which it slides in. (Shown in example A1 & A2)















Due to tillering the libs that is actually never the case. The limb cylinder lies in that grove more at an angle due to the orientation of the limb and its tiller setup (I have overdramatized the angle here to show the actual difference more easily). I've put this angel more to an extreme on example B1 & B2 to show the difference. What you can see is that the cross-section of this "round" cylinder changes to an oval due to the angle of the limb. This results in most cases in only one pressure point (in the bet case into 3 tiny ones if you can count the two on the side when the tolerances are correct). 
Now it's very easy for the limb cylinder to gain lateral play since the force that presses against the radius is (in all cases) way less than the force that pushes the limb back (in the orientation of the arrow) against the resting spots on the tiller bolts and on the T-block (behind the grove).


----------



## Dennis2581

I'm not able to attach more than 5 pictures in one post, so here's pt2 ;-)

C1 & C2 and D1 & D2 shows my idea, which is a combination of a matching radius and a V-shape. The limb cylinder would always gain lateral support between two connection points. No matter if the limb is tillered more parallel or way more at an angle. Once again I've overdramatized the angle to show you the actual difference and that it is able to rest and sit properly. With these pictures in mind, it is maybe also a bit easier to guess about what detail I'm speaking in the examples A & B.


----------



## Dennis2581

Had some late-night mistakes in the previous assembly. 

Here are a few more insights on the version I'm going to machine within the next days (if time allows).
Maybe I'm able to fix the riser until I hear anything from W&W or my Uukha stuff arrives ;-)


----------



## tooold

I'd be interested how your solution works. If I have a problem with my riser, I might order your repair solution from you. What would you charge? Might be the start of a nice little business.


----------



## Metropolis

If the excessive play comes from a too large tolerance in CNC machining as you mentioned earlier, this new shape becomes unnecessary. W&W’s conception already provides lateral support when it’s correctly machined.









Hoyt system (Aerotec or even cast TD4) was sufficient without such engineering. Also a japanese company working on the tiller bolt to reduce vibrations, just needed a single hole with a slight bevel deep down. This means you can lock the limbs without any contact from the cylinder (By the way it looks like the old Yamaha's system - the bloc was in plastic and worked perfectly till you accept to watch your limbs fly in case of string breaking).

https://youtu.be/m_BVVG-sWA8?t=632


----------



## Dennis2581

Metropolis said:


> If the excessive play comes from a too large tolerance in CNC machining as you mentioned earlier, this new shape becomes unnecessary. W&W’s conception already provides lateral support when it’s correctly machined.



It's a thin aluminum block in which a steel bolt grinds in and out 10-15 times a week (in my case) every time I set up and pack my bow. It is a matter of time until this block develops play. 
Also keep in mind that the contact surface (marked read in your post) is very small (about 1mm² on each side). We checked a few more W&W and Hoyt risers at the club. Interestingly I'm not the only one having this issue, while all Hoyt risers were rocksolid. So I'm questioning W&W's concept ;-)

I'm happy to argue about the necessary of my design. 
Bottom line, the stock option doesn't work in my case and I don't trust the whole thing in general anymore. So if I'm spending time designing a solution that fits MY PERSONAL requirements, I do it correctly. The reason for my design is to be double secure. First with the harder material and tight tolerances, secondly with the radius/V-slot concept as a backup.



tooold said:


> I'd be interested how your solution works. If I have a problem with my riser, I might order your repair solution from you. What would you charge? Might be the start of a nice little business.


Let me check if it works as expected. If so, I'm happy to make a small series in exchange for material/machining costs. (there's at least already an interest in our club). 
I don't want to gain any business by fixing something that should work an a riser from stock, but I'm happy to fix it at a flat 0.


----------



## tassie_devil

“ I don't want to gain any business by fixing something that should work an a riser from stock, but I'm happy to fix it at a flat 0.”

- It is worth remembering that you seem to have a dud individual item, the tone of your post makes it seem like the no doubt thousands of W&W risers out there are faulty. This is hardly likely the case. It is also worth noting that wearing the groove in the bottom of the block won’t affect fit of the limbs strung. Other materials may work better in some ways, but I doubt many people will be able to ‘wear out’ an aluminium t-block to the point the limbs don’t fit.


----------



## Dennis2581

tassie_devil said:


> the tone of your post makes it seem like the no doubt thousands of W&W risers out there are faulty.


Yes, by now I do think so! How many have checked and tested it like damiaan or I did and started questioning the whole thing?
By now I have got a few PMs referring to the same issue and it also appears to happen on other risers of club members.



tassie_devil said:


> It is also worth noting that wearing the groove in the bottom of the block won’t affect fit of the limbs strung.


It definitely does, please see post #87. Please believe what you want and if I'm talking trash, so should it be.


----------



## Dennis2581

As promised, here's an update on the warranty claim;

I've just received a call from from Eddy Jung (marketing director) at the W&W headquarter in Korea. 

Very friendly guy and I was happy to finally be able to talk to someone who's in charge. He apologized for the inconveniences and totally understands the situation. He also mentioned that they are aware of this problem (I'm not the only one) and working on a solution. I'm expecting an email from him in a few minutes, arranging the final details on a full replacement of the riser AND limbs (which should not be faulty). This was the very first thing they have offered me in order to solve this problem (which surprised me tbh). 

Over all I'm looking forward to the replacements and to see if there's actually any difference (I'm expecting that there is one). 
Nevertheless I'll continue working on my T-block solution to be on the safe side.


----------



## UK_Stretch

Good to hear. Well done W&W. 

Stretch


----------



## Dennis2581

Hey,

Just here with a little update. The limbs have just arrived from Korea. Expecting the riser to arrive from China within the next days to see how everything turns out. 
My T-blocks are also expected to be ready within the next days. I've got a few PMs on this topic but it looks like I'm unable to answer them (message board doesn't show any sent messages when I replied). Sorry about that. I'll definitely keep you updated here and if it's okay, I'd leave my email address here?

Another funny thing happened at our first remote competition last weekend (50 people went through the rounds parallel on multiple fields all over Austria).
Set up the bow and showed a friend the issue by just tilting the limbs by hand around the limb pockets. During the training and the first 3 sets of arrows, I was spreading the arrows over the whole target face (without any super crazy mistakes on my side). Became super frustrated and just decided to unstring the bow and string it again to hopefully get a better alignment. After I did that, my arrows were grouping fairly okay again (within the 8 rings, sometimes even tighter). The first 18 cored arrows ended up in a total of 121 points, while the next 18 arrows ended up in a total of 153 points. The 2nd round (36 arrows) came to a total of 303 points (with one miss due to an unwanted release when I tried to let the bow down for another attempt).

Best regards
Dennis


----------



## Dennis2581

Another Update;

The riser still hasn't showed up (it has been 3 weeks now unfortunately). But after solving some little issues, I was able to finish my T-block design. 

The limbs sit in rocksolid with no lateral movement whatsoever. Limb alignment took me about 10 minutes (unlike 3h last time with the stock T-blocks) and the limbs stayed even after multiple unstringing and removing the limbs. 

For the first time I was able to set up a proper center shot and I'm super curious to see how it feels and shoot like at 70m. I should be able to get to the club tomorrow. 
The only recognizable difference I noticed while shooting a few arrows at a super short distance at home is the sound after the release which hasn't that much of a resonance and felt more damped... we'll see. 















Haven't tested the replacement limbs yet since there's obviously nothing wrong with my existing set of limbs. I'll wait until the replacement riser arrives and give everything a try together (before sending back one riser and one set of limbs as discussed with W&W).. After all this time and based on the experience I've gained with the T-block design, I do not think that replacing the riser will help in any way so.. considering import fees, taxes and the cost for return shipping it's just another 200$ on top without a proper having a proper solution (if I wouldn't have the ability to work on my own solution). 
As impolite as this may sounds but I'm still very disappointed, considering all this time and money spent for a "top of the line" riser. Enjoying W&W limbs for over a decade was the trigger to try out a riser as well. 

I've learned a lessen and look forward to shoot this (hopefully now) proper working riser until a permanent replacement from a trustworthy company shows up ;-)


----------



## calbowdude

Your solution looks amazing. You should sell it!


----------



## Dennis2581

Hey guys, 

I've started a 2nd attempt in replying to a few messages since some people have not received my reply. 
@Itsjtome, I'm not able to reply to your PM ("Itsjtome has chosen not to receive private messages or may not be allowed to receive private messages. Therefore you may not send your message to him/her.")

My prototype works quite well and I'm going to to some more shooting this afternoon. Recently I talked to a business partner who's machining parts for my main business to check on costs for a small series. It is possible and, considering the small series, I assume the price is okay (parts for a pair are roughly €50 (56$). 
I'm going to make a small series of 25 pairs (which will be available in about 2-3 weeks) soon. 

I've listed these T-blocks on my website (I'm building custom drum hardware & upgrades for a living) to offer it on a non-profit basis. 
If anyone's interested, feel free to have a look. 
I hope it's okay to leave the link below. Shipping internationally via UPS takes about 2-4 business days, variates between €14-28 (depending on the location), and has proven to work great. https://www.acd-unlimited.at/english/onlineshop/archery-upgrades/


----------



## Dennis2581

First outdoor test with the new blocks installed. Considering just having a rough tuning and not being in good shape today, this has been the best training session I had in a while... Believe me or not but it's kinda relief being able to shoot consistent groups again after blaming myself all the time after switching risers!

There were not many really clean shots and I struggled with some rough mistakes (mainly releasing without proper back tension and dropping the bow arm - quite obvious on picture 4) 
After 12 ends of 6 arrows at 70m my lowest score was 49 and my highest a 57 (two times) which isn't anything I have ever shot this season or maybe even ever.. 

(Edit, sorry, pictures are turned 90°)


----------



## waxyjaywalker

This thread is the best story I read this year. There's conflict, strong characterization with vocal opinions, technical analysis, catharsis, and a happy ending. 10/10 will read through again.


----------



## Dennis2581

The new riser has arrived yesterday.

Finally, I could test the new limbs and riser and also compare them "old" limbs and old riser with my custom T-blocks installed.

Unfortunately and as expected, the stock T-block in the new riser (which has never seen a single arrow) has the same amount of play around the t-blocks a my "faulty" one. I'm expecting this play to become even larger after a few ends of arrows and setting up the bow a few times. (see video below)

Honestly I was very thankfull to receive a call from W&W and about the overall contact and support.,
Based on their explanation, I expected an issue with the tolerances, I accepted the replacement offer and hoped to "just" have bought a faulty riser in the first place...

Bottom line: W&W seems to have a major issue with their current riser / limb alignment design. 
They said, they are aware of this problem and offered me to replace riser and limbs (had to pay import fees and customs, and also would need to send the "old" limbs & riser back - which would add another 180$ in total on top of my already expensive riser).. After 4 weeks, finally, both replacements have arrived and still show the same issue originally claimed...
The only proper working solution (at least for me) are my own T-blocks (which also cost me about 120$ to machine - single parts are stupidly expensive to get machined).

I'm going to contact W&W again with these new insights and be super curious to see how we end up.. at the moment I have a brand new sets of riser and limbs at home I don't need or could use (I'd need to send back one set anyway), along with my upgraded "old" combo, which will be sold and replaced by another brand soon (since I have developed serious trust issues with W&W over the pasts months and can not really look at their products anymore without getting quite mad)


----------



## UK_Stretch

That is disappointing.

If you had to pay import duties for warranty replacement goods then the manufacturer should be refunding the duties and you are not obliged to return the faulty goods at your cost - you already paid import on the faulty materials, there is nothing due. If the original item is faulty it is the manufacturers obligation to meet the costs. I guess this is the problem with the manufacturer picking it up instead of a local dealer. No idea why they replaced the limbs if they were then going to ask for the old limbs back - that is odd. 

I can understand your loss of faith but be clear, there is no issue with the limbs. Only the new riser design. I can see why you’d put the ATF-X behind you but if you like the limbs, don’t throw the baby out with the bath water :wink:

Mind you, there are a lot of good bows out there at the moment. I think all the main manufacturers (and some of the smaller ones too) have good offerings in limbs and riser. It seems to be a very level playing field equipment wise.

Good luck with whichever direction you choose

Stretch


----------



## Dennis2581

UK_Stretch said:


> I can understand your loss of faith but be clear, there is no issue with the limbs. Only the new riser design. I can see why you’d put the ATF-X behind you but if you like the limbs, don’t throw the baby out with the bath water :wink:
> Stretch


As silly as it sounds, but I'm pretty aware of what products I use and what brands I support. There's nothing wrong with my specific set of limbs (questioned why they wanted to exchange the limbs as well from the very beginning) and I enjoyed using W&W limbs for over a decade. The thing is, if I got really disappointed, I do prefer to step away from a brand completely (and I know that this might be a very questionable silliness, but also how my mind works ;-)). 

With other sports (mainly snowboarding in my case) and with my business I do prefer to cooperate or be a customer from smaller business who stand behind their product instead of "hiding" behind a huge marketing wall, outsourcing to sub manufacturers, having marketing managers and a chain of retail checkpoints (of which everyone wants its share which either drives the up price unnecessarily or forces businesses to cut cots on the actual product).. I do prefer to discuss certain things, especially if there's something questionable technical wise, with a person who's in charge of the construction or manufacturing instead of communicating with a marketing person who has usually no technical background - (disclaimer; the contact with W&W was always friendly and supportive, but I had the impression that they did not really got the point.)

I had a more passion driven opinion about W&W but with all this happenings I feel like its another major company with questionable structures who's trying to keep the head above the water..

After I noticed the issue and got in touch with W&W I had a gut feeling that they won't solve the issue as I'd expected. Shortly after I placed an order on a Uukha Xpro2 and some VX limbs (expecting the order to be ready within the next 2 weeks). They are a small brand, focusing on the product without heavy marketing and almost manufacturing next door in France. 

I wrote a few mails back and forward with them, asking some details by the end of last year and was pleased with some direct communication and a technical few point. The reason why I've chosen the ATF-X was the price point. I got the set of NX limbs offered fairly cheap (used to shoot Winex) by the time I considered getting a full Uukha setup and wanted to go with a modern, nice feeling and looking riser from the same brand. Felt, the ATF-X would be on point and loved the look of the setup.


----------



## Dennis2581

Good morning,

Yesterday we've tried to assemble the 2nd pair of prototype T-blocks in the Nano TFT Riser of a club member and as it has turned out, the T-block design seems to be slightly different (for whatever reason...) The shape is the same but the position of the set screws and the total height is a little bit different. I'll be able to modify my design to offer a version for the Nano TFT (and TFT-G, I assume) as well. 

In order to do that and especially to help others with the same issue, I'd need your help.
If you own one of the following risers, it would be a huge help if you could take a few pictures from (straight down from different sides) to see which riser uses which version. 
I'd expected that at least the T-block design hasn't changed (since there's no obvious reason if there's already a design version machined and in use that is 95% identical)...

ATF (the former ATF-X)
TFT-G
CK7
Radical Pro
Inno CXT 

Cheers,
Dennis



Left: Nano TFT block / Right: Modified ATF-X Block (you can see that the position of the set screws is different)


----------



## Dennis2581

I've received some more information and currently, it looks like there are two designs that fit the current riser lineup (and some older models).
So I'll work on a 2nd Version to fit the Nano TFT and other Carbon risers in order to cover most current T-Blocks versions. I've updated the informations on my website and will maintain the list of compatible risers. https://www.acd-unlimited.at/english/onlineshop/archery-upgrades/

Currently NO option for:
Winex 
Inno CXT

ATF-X Version fits:
ATF-X
ATF (very likely, still waiting for a picture of the original blocks)

Nano TFT Version fits:
Nano TFT
TFT-G
NanoMax
InnoMax


----------



## Dennis2581

Well.. I'm starting to get pissed. 

After first emails and calls saying "we know and we are sorry" I now received this statement which gives me the intension that they have not looked into the issue, my arguments or details of my problem along with my solution. Also, they are now able or willing to offer me any solution (since there was no further offer in how we can go ahead after I have received the 2nd faulty riser)

No matter if its an ATF, ATF-X, Nano TFT, why is W&W the only brand that shows lateral play around the pin?! (Hoyt, Gillo, and Uukha are rock solid, no matter what). 

This issue has been addressed and proven to exist by various people here and on other platforms. By now I have received quite some emails from others having a similar issue with the current riser lineup.

In-between the lines it's just an empty phrase trying to complimenting me but still not admitting that there is a "real" problem... I'm sick of it by now.. Several hundred dollars wasted and this is what you get.. No thanks. *Btw, I have also asked who's covering the import fees I had to pay along with return shipping in my last email and as you can see, this has totally been ignored.. Nobody knows, I guess?!*

_"Dear Dennis,



At first, We would like to say thank you for your effort and solution you made.

We can say that you came up with such a good idea, but actually there is not much difference from our system.

The gap in between block and dovetail is unavoidably designed only for sliding into the limb pocket.



If you change the center alignment by forcing the limbs to move to the lateral side without string(like you did on the first video), this is actually not necessary.

The reason is that shape of the block(especially hole area) and dovetail is the circle.

So once you put your sting on, automatically the center alignment will be made.

Even if you change the center alignment by intension, you may think the center is a bit off, but it comes back immediately after shooting.

However, your point is very good.

In fact, there is a slight gap due to the convenience of setting, but it seems necessary to minimize it.



Once again, We want to say thank you for your trial and time for this.

We will refer to your solution and keep you updated.



We can tell you that W&W is well known for “Good center alignment”

Also we have been trying to keep our perfection and name value at all times.

But we are ready to listen to the voice from dealers and customers, if there is any further development that we need to create.



Plus, I also have seen that you are ahead of patent pending of T-block.

Could you possibly tell me exactly which part is related to your patent?



Please let us know if you have any questions.



Thanks



Best regards.



Eddy JUNG."_


----------



## Dennis2581

Dennis2581 said:


> Also, they are now able or willing to offer me any solution (since there was no further offer in how we can go ahead after I have received the 2nd faulty riser)


* they are not able or willing (sorry about the typo)


----------



## Seattlepop

Create a non-existent problem, invent a solution, apply for a patent. What's next? IPO?


----------



## Dennis2581

Seattlepop said:


> Create a non-existent problem, invent a solution, apply for a patent. What's next? IPO?


1. Beliefe what you want. As it has been proven by now there is a problem(even W&W has confirmed it in their first response). If there wasn't any problem, why has W&W offered me a warranty exchange in the first place? Why do others have a similar problem (see a post a few pages earlier), especially with the ATF-X (other's, such as the TFT of a club member and other "older" risers also show some play but by far not as drastically.

2. In one of my early emails I offered them to give them my design ideas to do whatever they want (since I'm in helping to solve the issue as well and do not care about costs or rights).
The reason why I started the patent-pending process is to prevent this case where they say "there is no problem" but in the end offering as a solution based on my ideas. If anyone's interested, I'd be more than happy to share everything and give the concept away. (I just don't like to be fooled for over 1000$). The only reason that I've started to work on my solution is to show that there is an issue that could be easily fixed (and to have a working setup until my new setup arrives). 

As long as they don't admit that there's an issue and start to work on that stuff I'm not willing to support this business anymore. 


Cheers.


----------



## Seattlepop

You are demanding zero tolerance between the T-block and the dove-tail bushing. Any mfr that would do that would end up with half their product being returned because of machine tolerances preventing limbs from mounting at all because they are too tight. It has been stated here that the beauty of the ILF system is that it is self-centering when strung. W&W said this in their letter as well. 

The problem, imho, starts here : *“I'm a mechanical engineer myself and handling extreme precision parts every day.”* (Emphasis added). Being highly disappointed in the lack of “extreme precision” may have affected your shooting as well. Admittedly, I know lack of confidence in my kit would affect my shooting, however misplaced. 

Kudos to W&W for their gracious handling of your complaint.


----------



## GoldArcher403

Reading through this novel of a thread baffles me. I have shot W&W for years and have never experienced this issue. My current TFT set up uses that same block and my limbs do not shift side to side like that, they are solid with near-zero play. Seems to me you got the black sheep of the herd.


----------



## GoldArcher403

Dennis2581 said:


> I feel like its another major company with questionable structures who's trying to keep the head above the water..


Cant understand what makes you say this. W&W is one of the oldest names in the game and probably the one with the highest reputation. I dont see why one defect riser is reason to throw a brand out the window. If I threw away products every time I found a flaw I wouldn't own anything


----------



## theminoritydude

"The reason why I started the patent-pending process is to prevent this case where they say "there is no problem" but in the end offering as a solution based on MY ideas. "

I'd like to state for the record that the above statement is inaccurate.


----------



## tassie_devil

Whilst the initial video seemed to indicate some issue with the original bow stringed, the last video is baffling. You seem to be complaining about play in the limbs with the bow unstrung. Mine just about fall out of the riser (a humble, Chinese made, WNS forged elite) with limb bolts most of the way out. But I can’t move the limbs when the bow is strung. This is part of the ILF system.

I think you’ll enjoy shooting Gillo stuff. I’d like to give it a try. I’m a fan of the company, but can’t really justify any more gear at the current point in time.


----------



## Dennis2581

Seattlepop said:


> Admittedly, I know lack of confidence in my kit would affect my shooting, however misplaced.


The only problem is that I started questioning the precision and looked further into that area AFTER I had issues scoring as I was used to with my former setup over months. 
I had no doubt that W&W makes top of the line products when purchasing the setup. After all of this my guess is that W&W makes to f the line carbon composite products but lags in finding solutions for critical mechanical points along with outsourcing manufacturing. I've worked long enough in and with larger companies to know phases like "it's supposed to be that way - it's not a bug, it's a feature" while the truth is that there is a way to get things straight (but not if you need to rely on a certain price point along with manufacturing huge quantities).

As far as I am ethically question Hoyt for their hunting products I can see that they spent quite some time and take effort around the limb pocket connection along with Gillo and Uukha who all seem to be aware of a good connection. While W&W seems to think "hmm a simple T-slot should do it since it will be self-aligned anyway, no matter how much play this connection has" (which is obviously not the case as showed in earlier posts explaining the radius and lateral support)

The thing is. Just because a company is huge and in the game for decades does not prevent them from making mistakes (I can remember one of their risers with a built-in dampener above the main stabilizer bushing which should extend in the direction of the arrow to dampen string movement and almost all of these dampener got stuck within 1-3 years). It's also a bit controversial advertising a super rigid riser but in the same time to allow the limbs lateral movement during the release (since it will self center anyway after the shot). 

Since you questioned that there is a problem in general... In my case I was able to set the limbs straight and after a few shots they went out of line - readjusted them again and after a few more shots again, the limbs moved. All of this with a noticeable creek sound through the clicker (from time to time). 

I know that I'm not an easy person. On the other hand I'm constantly in a technical and super rational mindset. 
Trust me, I'd have better things to do than sitting here arguing or working on a solution. The thing that drives me is the (by now, earlier conversations with W&W were absolutely okay) statement of the brand along with some comments here. "It's W&W, they are big and for sure know what they do". During my first posts I have got a few messages from other people and even one or another smaller brand and dealer addressing that there is an issue. 

As it looks like there is a significant drop in accuracy around the limb pockets with the new lineup. 

Others having the same issue told me that there is some play in TFTs as well but by far not as significant as on the ATF-X. I have experienced the same thing at our club, where the TFTs showing some play but still performing good and staining aligned. The thing is, until a certain point, the argument of the self aligning radius is true but there's a point, if this play is big enough, where it show its negativities like in my case and does not stay in line. 

Yes, I'm probably just the only person within thousands having received a faulty riser. But keep in mind that I have almost spent 800€ for this riser which is to me quite some money, so I assume I can expect a working solution. 

Since the replacement riser showed an equal amount of play I did not start set up the bow and all of that stuff just to proof in another video that the issue is still there. If it helps I'd be more than happy to do a video showing the movement of the limbs along the string just by applying a little force. 

Just think about it from a business standpoint. If they would say "yes, there is a mistake with certain risers and we will fix it" how much money and time that would cost, going through stocks of risers and offering a replacement program, compared to say "it's all good, we know what we do..". 

When they said the gonna replace my riser and limbs I expected they do both because they will send me a setup that they checked. After receiving a tracking number from China for the riser and another one from Korea for the Limbs, I knew that the must have taken just some items from the shelf. That was the point where I had this gut feeling that the issue would might not be solved and started working on my own attempt for a solution. 

I know that I could just say that I have made my own solution which works and that's it. But I do like to straighten things out until they are correct. If a company (I also make mistakes as a business from time to time) makes mistakes they should solve it within the legal guidelines. In case of a warranty replacement (as they have offered me without asking for) all costs (import fees, shipping costs and return shipping,...) must be covered by the business. On the other hand I'm as a customer need to give them the chance to fix the problem once before asking for a refund. This is how it works within the EU. 

W&W seems not willing to cover my expenses (import fees, etc) and after having a similar issue again, it looks like they are not willing to go along with a refund for the riser. 

May you asked why I just haven't returned the stuff to my dealer. 

I've purchased the riser from a small lokal dealer (he's running the shop as a side business) to support him instead of ordering it online to save a few bucks. 
After receiving the riser, I have noticed the few cosmetic machining issue but decided to no bother my dealer with that. Also I was super thrilled and happy to finally having a new riser and just didn't want to wait a few weeks again until another left hand model would be in stock at the distributor.

After I noticed the issue with the limb alignment I have shot the riser for about 3 months and contacted my dealer. 
He has reached out to W&W and the distributor independently from me. He received a call from Eddy (Marketing Manager at W&W) and gave him my contact. After that, I received a call from him (see earlier post for details). 

By now I could just take legal actions against my dealer (since it's the place I have purchased the riser from) to return the riser. The reason why I don't want to do this is simply that he would need to cover the damage and would have to pay the refund out of his own pocket without the chance of returning the riser to his distributor or even W&W and getting compensated as well (since by now they are not willing to see a problem anymore). Yes, it would not be my problem anymore but I'm not really in the mood for making a small dealer's life even harder than it already is during this pandemic. 

And that's basically the whole story why I'm so upset by now.

Over and out.
Cheers


----------



## damiaan

Just as information, a friend of mine bought a left handed ATF-X yesterday and I was able to check myself for play in the limb pockets, and I could not feel any movement.
this was with NS-foam limbs


----------

