# Thinking of going to Carbon One from X7's



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

I'm thinking of swapping my 2114 X7's (30.5" shaft length at 30.1" draw/125 grn. point/43# 990TX) out for some Carbon One's, probably 29.5" in 600-700 spine or so, depending on where the tune will end up, probably 100 grn up the front. 

I've calculated I'll pick up about 30 fps which should give me much better sight markings (which I'm going to need to shoot 70 and 90 effectively).

Is it worth making the swap?


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

I have a JOAD shooter that switched to Carbon 1's from heavier arrows. Another adult recurver is also using these for field and 3D events. They seem straight, and they were easy to tune. Plus they are way cheaper than ACE/Mckinney/X10/Nano XR or Pro. Definitely a good choice for the budget conscious shooter looking to make 70/90 meters.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Given the acceptability of the tolerances and the similarities in weight and diameter to ACE's, I wonder why more don't shoot them in preference to ACE's.
Especially non-elite archers or field archers given the relative costs.

The only advantage of the carbon-aluminium arrows I can think of is the safety aspect.

I've used them for two years for indoor and field and within my limited abilities have found no problems with them.

Only grumble is the inconsistency in size between different colours of the Easton Pin nocks I used with them. Thankfully Beiter do nocks that fit them.


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

I consider them equivalent shaft to acg, at a lower cost. Some very good scores have been shot with them and they seem quite sturdy.

Some years ago I shot vectors, which were similarish shafts, only with inferior carbon construction. I scored same as with ace's at the time. They were priced same as navigators, which probably turned up to be their downfall.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

Sounds good. I think I'll order up a set from Alternative...$150/doz including pins, nocks, points, 100 pk vanes and postage.

I'm having trouble with longer distances i.e. 70 meters. I'm shooting good groups at 18, 20, 30, 40 and 50m but not getting the expected increase in group size at 60, 70 and 90m. My form is staying together but I think my arrows give up after around about 50- I think they're slowing down (being big, fat shafts that aren't going fast to begin with) and destabilizing. Occasionally I notice the arrow flight looking good initially, then it starting to adopt a sporadic flight as distance goes on. I just refletched my arrows with an offset to induce more spin which should hopefully keep them stable at least out to 70 (well I hope so, tournament this weekend).


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

I'm interested in what's your reasoning behind going with 600-700 spine Easton Ones, rather than 500-550 spine. Are your 2114's a bit stiff at your draw length and weight (30.1" 43#)? I'm not being critical, just curious.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

TER said:


> I'm interested in what's your reasoning behind going with 600-700 spine Easton Ones, rather than 500-550 spine. Are your 2114's a bit stiff at your draw length and weight (30.1" 43#)? I'm not being critical, just curious.


It's simply what TAP suggests. The exact spine I'll get depends on the length and point weight I end up going with. Would you suggest the heavier spine?


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

Well, I'm just saying the spine of 2114's is 0.510, so it seems to me that if they tune well for you, the equivalent spine Carbon One's would be a good place to start.


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

TER said:


> Well, I'm just saying the spine of 2114's is 0.510, so it seems to me that if they tune well for you, the equivalent spine Carbon One's would be a good place to start.


I noticed the disparity but kept quiet as I shoot barebow-stringwalking and there may be a different spine requirement for OR. 
However, three-under at the nock, as close to split-finger as I get....... 40# OTF, 29.75" DL, 28" BOP Carbon One 600's with 80 grain tips are acting weak with medium button pressure. 
I should be using a longer shaft, probably 550.
Some places may sell the shafts individually so you could buy a half dozen 550's and a half dozen 500's and see which work best.


----------



## TER (Jul 5, 2003)

Yes to Greysides. Lancaster Archery Supply seems to sell them individually, so maybe try 6 at a time and see how they tune. Once you know for sure the spine you want, buy a dozen at Alternative, since they offer the best value, even with the shipping cost, Alternative offers the best price.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

TER said:


> Well, I'm just saying the spine of 2114's is 0.510, so it seems to me that if they tune well for you, the equivalent spine Carbon One's would be a good place to start.


Yeah, I'm planning on having the Carbon One's about an inch shorter seen as my 2114's are long as it is


----------



## Sanford (Jan 26, 2009)

Bean Burrito said:


> Yeah, I'm planning on having the Carbon One's about an inch shorter seen as my 2114's are long as it is


43#, 29.5" BOP shaft length, .600 spine, you will want to try the 70-90gr break-off points.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

Sanford said:


> 43#, 29.5" BOP shaft length, .600 spine, you will want to try the 70-90gr break-off points.


You're right, I just ran the numbers on a spreadsheet I've got and ideal point weight looks to be 85 grn (which I can do, I'll just chuck them up on the lathe and turn the ed off).

I have an old TAP (the evaluation version) and I can't seem to get good numbers out of it. When I bought my arrows I got them long and cut them/experimented with weights until they tuned just right, but it tells me the arrows I have now are still WAY stiff for my bow.


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

If you want to actually hit something at 90m, definetely go for 120, min 110gr points.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

Hmm... The 85's wouldn't give me a great FOC or mass so that might be a good idea. I have some room to play with length so could go a tiny bit shorter with 110 grn up front


----------



## ArtV (Jan 29, 2008)

I've gone to Gold Tip Entrada Ultra lights 600 spin @ 5.7 gr per inch. 165.3 gr @ 29" (A bit lighter than Carbon 1 @ 6.9 gr per in. and lighter than ACE @ 182.7 gr @ 29"). 
About MSRP $80 per doz. ($60 per doz at Lancaster). Point weight adjustable system available to dial in an accurate tune. And, I think they are made in America. 

Art


----------



## Mithril (Dec 4, 2010)

Goldtip doesn't make any arrows in the United States. Carbon Ones are made in USA, says so right on the shaft.


----------



## Matterhorn (Mar 27, 2010)

zal said:


> If you want to actually hit something at 90m, definetely go for 120, min 110gr points.


Zal, where do you get the 120gr tips, I was under the impression that 110 was as high as it goes from Carbon One


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

Point is, go as heavy as you can. Most consider 110g as a "light" point.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

I own a lathe and if I needed to, could buy a length of tool steel and turn my own points. What tip weight would you guys think of as being ideal?


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

I made a point to practice, just to see how it would come out. Note this is made to fit a larger Easton Powerflight shaft because I had some cutoffs.

I decided to use a short, fat point (bulging out past the shaft OD). Why? Wouldn't that lead to excessive wind drift and drag?

Well, not really. Take for example two exposed points (assume shank length is the same). They both have a volume of 1000mm^3 (1cc). A point 10mm in diameter would need to be 12.73mm long (cylinders for sake of simplicity), while a point 5.5mm in diameter would need to be 42.09mm long. Hence The bulge point has a side area of 127.3mm^2, while the ultra thin low wind drift point has a side area of 231.495mm^2! Meaning the fat point will be affected roughly only 54% as much as the thinner point.

The fatter point would also have a much higher FOC, would penetrate less deeply into targets, pull easier and not destroy targets like micro diameter shafts are known for. Obviously a 10mm wide point on a X10/micro shaft would be excessive, but even a point of perhaps 7mm diameter would offer improvements. Not to mention extreme durability compared to the needle sized points.

On the downside, the points would likely be less efficient aerodynamically; however I think that this may not be as bad as some might think. A parabolic bulged point would still keep a fairly low CD and the increase in diameter would break up airflow for a fair amount of the shaft, reducing surface drag. So the difference could be insignificant. 









It may not look huge, but that is in fact a 125 grn point (and it's still a fairly small shaft, and the shank is short).


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

For ~600 spine arrows, 110gr will be fine.


----------



## scottranderson (Aug 9, 2009)

They are a good spot arrow for everyday spot shooting. They group very well.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

My trial of TAP expired...so unless anyone knows a good free spine calc (Stu Miller's is more a traditional thing and can be really wrong for an olympic setup) could someone run my specs? Cookies up for grabs.

30.9" draw length
43# Hoyt 990TX at full draw
25" riser 70" bow
625 Dyneema 16 strnd
Easton Carbon One shafts (410, 450, 500, 550, 600, 660, 730, 810)
Easton g nocks (not pins) small groove
Easton Diamond 4grn each x 3 vanes OR spinwings (is there much difference in the numbers?)
No cresting
110 grn breakoff point
30.5"-31" BOP length
8 7/8" brace

Can someone run any numbers (on a proper archery setup, not the Easton calc, I don't want arrows 3 spines too stiff) and let me know how it comes out? Cheers!

Edit: Stu's program with a - 3/16" center cut (found someone recommended it for olympic recurves) gave me a dynamic spine at 31" BOP suggested a .450 shaft which is what the easton chart came out with. If anyone could confirm or suggest something else would be very appreciated! :thumbs_up


----------



## WMalinak (Dec 10, 2010)

I'm thrilled with my Carbon One setup...
Spine=600, Carbon One pins, Easton G Pin nocks, 110 gr. Carbon One SS Break-Off points, Spin Wing 1.75 vanes.
My arrow length is 29.5 in; the measured *FOC is 14.6%* -- beautiful carry when holding 41#.
The only change I anticipate is going to 1 9/16 Spin Wings.

Just ordered similar setup for my youngest son (holding ~32#)...
moving him from xx75 Platinum Plus 2013 to Carbon One 660 (with a maize & blue theme).

Kudos to coach MikeW for all the answers *and* CraigG at ArrowSportArchery for putting together my kit.


----------



## limbwalker (Sep 26, 2003)

Just curious - does the Carbon One accept ACE components?


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Reading the catalogue............yes.

The ACE pin is used, instead of a C-1 pin, for some of the weaker spines but the blurb says 'also uses ACE components'.


----------



## Bean Burrito (Apr 20, 2011)

410-730 take Carbon One components while 810-1150 sizes take ACE components, and both accept G nocks. I think the larger sizes are only larger than an ACE by a very small amount.

Currently waiting on my shafts to get here...will post some results once I have them


----------



## Greysides (Jun 10, 2009)

Greysides said:


> Reading the catalogue............yes.
> 
> The ACE pin is used, instead of a C-1 pin, for some of the weaker spines but the blurb says 'also uses ACE components'.


With reference to what BB has said, I hope i've not mislead. I thought initially the answer was 'no' but I did check the 2011 Target Catalogue.

This is these are the appropriate parts, make of them what you will:


----------



## big cypress (Jul 31, 2006)

just stumbled across this and curious to know what happened as i was thinking of switching from 2013pp to carbon 1 600-660 . i shoot compound , fingers , accuwheels , 40 pounds , 29 inch draw . advice welcomed . . .peace


----------

