# Ben Pearson Javelina 7060



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

There were no options for that bow, and it only changed (slightly) cosmetically through it's years.

Letting the bow sit strung may not do that much for string creep, and it's final length will occur within it's first shooting session. 
A 12 strand B-50 string is appropriate as is a 7.5" brace.
If properly waxed, the string won't loose any twists and it will hold it brace. 
(When unstrung, the upper string loop is simply slide down the upper limb.)

The bow is 37# at 28", and a 400 spine arrow is close to twice what is requires. 
With a 29" arrow and nominal head weights, an 1816s (756 deflection) would be appropriate. 

As for refinishing, do as little as possible. 
Try finish sanding with 300 - 600 grit and/or rubbing/polishing compound first.
If it needs more, you'll have to sand down to the wood.
The use your choice of finish, from Tru-oil to any of the polyurethanes. 
Finish with some type of furniture wax.

I have three of those, and while a little harsh, remain one of BP's better shooting bows, in it's price range.

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> B -
> 
> There were no options for that bow, and it only changed (slightly) cosmetically through it's years.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the input Viper1, I’ll look I️ to getting some arrows in the 750 spine range. My main concern with the refusing is loosing the writing on the brace, I️ guess as long is I️ don’t sand all the way down to the wood I’d be okay. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Ben Pearson bows can be dated to a point by the logo. They changed it every two years up to 1969. Up to 1967 they used a three digit item number. In 1968, he sold the company and the new owners went to a four digit number. The logo on your bow is the 68/69 logo and that is confirmed by the four digit number. The Javelina was one of Ben's early 60's designs (They did not start naming bows until around 1960 / 1961. The Javelina first appeared around that time. Here is the original design from the 1963 catalog.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Here is the second generation, this is the 1968 catalog


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

And here is the 1969 catalog. Yours has the unique design on the riser. This was not done all the time. The Javelina was a mid-range, target / Hunting bow and quite popular. It was noted for being a smooth and accurate shooter. I have restored many Ben Pearson bows. I sand them down til the old finish is off and use different coatings from Tru-Oil, Polyurethane, to Poly Arcylic. Each has it advantages and disadvantages. When sanding the limbs, you do not have to be super gentle. Sand enough to remove the old coating, sand evenly and you will be fine. Nice bow, Been looking for a left handed one for a while now.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

3D Archery said:


> And here is the 1969 catalog. Yours has the unique design on the riser. This was not done all the time. The Javelina was a mid-range, target / Hunting bow and quite popular. It was noted for being a smooth and accurate shooter. I have restored many Ben Pearson bows. I sand them down til the old finish is off and use different coatings from Tru-Oil, Polyurethane, to Poly Arcylic. Each has it advantages and disadvantages. When sanding the limbs, you do not have to be super gentle. Sand enough to remove the old coating, sand evenly and you will be fine. Nice bow, Been looking for a left handed one for a while now.
> 
> View attachment 6300643


Thanks 3D Archery, it’s interesting to hear from you because your YouTube channel is the reason I️ chose a Ben Pearson bow. You always seemed quite happy with the ones you shot. I’ve watched all of your refinishing videos 2 or 3 times each so I️ think I’ve got a decent idea about what I’m getting into. Haha.

My main concern with refinishing the bow is I️ don’t want to lose the writing on the riser or the designs near the limbs. Is the writing actually on the wood and below the original finish? 

Thanks for all the great information so far. I’m sure I’ll be pestering the members I this forum plenty about form and tuning and such. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Also, I️ purchased a stick on rest but is it necessary with this bow? The shelf seems awfully flat but I️ do know guys shoot of the colt shelf which the colt a javelina seem to be of the same design.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

I have a fond memory of that bow, as I used one in my first ever archery competition in 1974. Can’t remember much about the bow itself, other than it was a club-owned bow (University of Toronto). I think it was 30# and I shot 28” 1716. 

Viper’s advise sounds good, although I might go with 8 1/2” BH.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Stash said:


> I have a fond memory of that bow, as I used one in my first ever archery competition in 1974. Can’t remember much about the bow itself, other than it was a club-owned bow (University of Toronto). I think it was 30# and I shot 28” 1716.
> 
> Viper’s advise sounds good, although I might go with 8 1/2” BH.


Hey thanks for that stash. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of people who talk about this model bow online so it’s cool to hear stories about them. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

The writing is on the wood, just under the coating. It may even have been placed on the first coat. If you sand it, it will disappear. As for the design, it looks like a thick ink decal. You could scan it and have a new one made. As for the rest, You can use a rest with those. Some of them came with them back in the day. I shoot off the shelf and have no problem with it. Oh, and thanks for watching and enjoy your bow. I do love my Ben Pearson's. I love shooting with guys with hundred and thousand dollars bows, and there is me, with a 50 year old bow I paid 45 bucks for, out shooting them.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

Stash -

The Jave is a semi recurve and going that high with the brace height removes a lot of the curve from the recurve. 
Dropping to 7.5" really wakes the thing up. 

3D - 

Given it's price point, it was entry level, and the next step up from the Cougar. 
Even though I have some interesting memories of the 62" Cougar, it really was a disaster to shoot. 

Neither were speed demons, but the very stiff limbs added a fair amount of stability to the shot. 
The bat wing design on the Jave dampened some of the shock the Cougar had. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Since you own a couple of them, I won’t second guess you on that, although the specs in the posts above do recommend anywhere between your 7 1/2 and my 8 1/2 suggestions.

I suspect the bow I shot way back then might still be stuffed in the back of the equipment locker at my current club which bought several of my university club’s bows a long time ago for their classes. I’ll have a look next time I’m there.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Viper1 said:


> Stash -
> 
> The Jave is a semi recurve and going that high with the brace height removes a lot of the curve from the recurve.
> Dropping to 7.5" really wakes the thing up.
> ...


The first Generation was a semi-recurve. The second generation was a full recurve.

The Colt was the entry or as they called it "Economy" model target / Hunting bow. The Javelina was a step up, then the Pinto and finally the Palomino.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

3d - 

The first gen was basically a joke (by today's standards, I'd hardly call it a recurve at all)) and the second was a semi recurve, despite what the ads said. 
That's why it required a low brace to work efficiently. 

The only real differences between the Colt and the Jave was the length and the tip over lays on the Jave, if you want to call them that, as they were more decorative than protective. 
Same production shortcuts were made on both.

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Thanks for all the great information guys. I️ plan to refinish the bow and get it looking nice and just start shooting.

3D- I️ plan to hunt with this bow so the white limbs are a no go. On one of your videos you put a vinyl of some sorts over your limbs. Where Can I find something like that? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

First check to see if your state has any weight limits.
While 37# (35xx) might be enough for deer, the "35" part might be problematic. if you get stopped. 

When that bow was made, we used bow socks or camo tape. 
Some hunting shops may still have them or if you can find blotchy contact paper, that can work as well. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> B -
> 
> First check to see if your state has any weight limits.
> While 37# (35xx) might be enough for deer, the "35" part might be problematic. if you get stopped.
> ...


Viper1- I’m in Missouri so there are not any minimum draw weight rules but I️ do want to be above 40xx. The bow is 37xx at 28” and I’m a 30” draw so I️ should be around the 45xx mark which I️ am comfortable with.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Those are decals and you can get them in any pattern, even custom. I got mine from a company called Limbsations. Good guy.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

3D Archery said:


> Those are decals and you can get them in any pattern, even custom. I got mine from a company called Limbsations. Good guy.


Thanks 3D you’ve been a ton of help. I’ll look into limbsation. I’ve got a few screw holes that need filled, on your YouTube channel you said you used an epoxy, is there a specific epoxy you recommend for filling nicks and holes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Viper1 said:


> 3d -
> 
> The first gen was basically a joke (by today's standards, I'd hardly call it a recurve at all)) and the second was a semi recurve, despite what the ads said.
> That's why it required a low brace to work efficiently.
> ...


Sorry, but the second generation is not a semi recurve. Also, 7.5 to 8.5 is a low brace height?
I can tell you from owning booth, that while similar in appearance, the Colt and Javelina are very different, and not just in length. The grip is the biggest difference. The Javelina, has a much more pronounced thumb rest than a Colt. It also has a radiused shelf, which the Colt does not. And finally, the riser it self has more mass.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

3D -

By current standards the second gen Jave is a semi recurve, and does not shoot (preform) well with a brace height above 7.5". 
Is is not what we would consider a full working recurve. But you're entitled to your opinion. 

The differences you mentioned between the Colt and the Jave are cosmetic at best, the design is the same.
They are effectively the same bow, except for the length, which may explain the riser mass. 

B - 

Think you're missing the meaning of the x's on the bow's legend. 
PB marked their bows in 5# increments and used "x's" to show the weighed weight of bow.
Each X before the number subtracts one pound and each X after the number adds a pound.
So, 35xx# = 37# and x35# = 34#

Viper 1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> 3D -
> 
> By current standards the second gen Jave is a semi recurve, and does not shoot (preform) well with a brace height above 7.5".
> Is is not what we would consider a full working recurve. But you're entitled to your opinion.
> ...


Viper1 - that is actually some great information. I️ had no clue that the x’s indicated pounds 
over/under the marked weight. I️ was under the assumption that the were simply a way to indicate the the number was the bows poundage. Thank you for that. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Viper1 said:


> 3D -
> 
> By current standards the second gen Jave is a semi recurve, and does not shoot (preform) well with a brace height above 7.5".
> Is is not what we would consider a full working recurve. But you're entitled to your opinion.
> ...


Current standards, oh okay. Funny how the Bear bows of similar design are still called recurves as are many others of similar design. 

As for the brace height statement, I have mine at 8" and shoots just fine. 

The mass difference is not only in length, but rather width and thickness. Just holding them, they feel different. 

Saying they are the same bow, is like saying a Mustang is like a Camaro, same design, it is just cosmetic.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Burtjb said:


> Thanks 3D you’ve been a ton of help. I’ll look into limbsation. I’ve got a few screw holes that need filled, on your YouTube channel you said you used an epoxy, is there a specific epoxy you recommend for filling nicks and holes?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I first put a dowel into it to fill it. I make sure the dowel is just below the surface. Then I apply epoxy over it and sand it flush. I use the quick dry epoxy from Home Depot. Good luck and please, keep me posted on how it comes out.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

3D - 

I have three Javes and each has slightly different riser dimensions and therefore mass. 
I also have a number of Damon Howatt Hunters with different grip contours, shelf configurations and riser lamination strips and even woods - does that make them different bows? 
I could also make similar statements about Bears, Wings, Hoyts and just about every other manufacture. 

As far as your car analogy, a closer one would be buying a Camaro with an RS or SS package. Different components, same car. 

I would also think twice about filling holes at this point.
Since you're new to this, those holes may have been there for a sight or other accessories.
Unless you're sure you're never going to need them, I would just use appropriately sized brass screws.
Can't tell you how many holes I've filled and regretted later. 

For filling, unless excessively large, plastic wood will suffice, and can be colored with Sharpies and sanded/finished. 
With a little practice, you might need a magnifying glass to find them  

Viper1 out.


----------



## MadJD (Oct 25, 2017)

3D Archery said:


> Current standards, oh okay. Funny how the Bear bows of similar design are still called recurves as are many others of similar design.


I think its just how a bow gets marketed. Matters little except for how it was originally sold as which I find interesting.

This your youtube channel 3D? https://www.youtube.com/user/gmr12508

JD.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Here is the progress thus far.









The first two pictures are how it came to me. The second two are it’s current state. I️ started with 60 grit, then 100, 150, and then 240. I’ll do 300, 400 then 600 before I️ finish it. 

I️ decided I️ could do without the embellishments on the tips of the riser but I️ wanted to keep the writing in the Handel so I️ tapes over the writing and sanded everything else.

Thanks for all the great info and advice so far guys. Next I’ll need shooting tips. Haha.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

It looks good.

If you look closely you'll see the riser is actually made up of several pieces of wood. 
It was a cost saving measure by BP, using thinner wood stock, but they were so good at it, you really had to be looking for it. 

The screws on the face of the bow may be problematic if you ever decide to compete with that bow. 
To make the bow BB legal, you would have to fill the holes smooth and either make them completely disappear or cover that section with a strip of tape. 

If you're not into competing, I'd leave them in. Ya never know.

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> B -
> 
> It looks good.
> 
> ...


Viper1 - thanks, I’m liking how it’s turning out so far. 

I️ have a question on what to finish it with. I️ do intend to hunt with this bow some so I️ want a matte finish but I also want it to look nice and smooth, I️ also need it to be waterproof. Is there a polyurethane that has a satin finish or should I️ consider some other finishing product? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

There are low gloss/matte polys from Varatahne and Minwax.
If you go the Tru-oil route, which isn't as strong, taking fine steel wool to it will leave you with a matte (dull) finish.

I prefer a gloss finish, because that's how the bows came from the factory, and just cover them up when you hunt. 

Do you know what your draw length is? 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Roadsnakes (Nov 29, 2016)

I really can`t tell by the pics, but the bow doesn`t look in really bad shape.

Before going the refinishing route, I`d try cleaning, polishing compound, and waxing.

The polishing compound part might be tedious and time consuming, but it worked for me once.

Here`s the link to the old thread............

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showthread.php?t=4679393


'


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> B -
> 
> There are low gloss/matte polys from Varatahne and Minwax.
> If you go the Tru-oil route, which isn't as strong, taking fine steel wool to it will leave you with a matte (dull) finish.
> ...


Viper1 - I️ do like a nice glossy bow finish and I️ may still do a high gloss poly just for nostalgic purposes. It’s the way old Ben Pearson intended them to look so I️ may as well respect that. Lol.

As far as draw weight I’ve done the old wing span divided by 2.5 trick and ended up with 28 7/8” but my anchor point is pretty far back so I’d guess I’m more between 29 1/2” to 30”.

I️ prefer shooting 3 under, will that be a problem with this bow? I️ don’t know if the bows tiller will work for that type of draw.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Roadsnakes said:


> I really can`t tell by the pics, but the bow doesn`t look in really bad shape.
> 
> Before going the refinishing route, I`d try cleaning, polishing compound, and waxing.
> 
> ...


Wow, that thing looks great roadsnakes! I’m already too deep to turn back now. Lol. There will be plenty more vintage bows in my future so I’ll try that on the next one. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

Three under certainly won't be a problem.
We all know that most good bows in that weight should be adequate for deer sized animals, but if your DL is longer, better. (Forget the wingspan thing.)
The Jave's limbs aren't the smoothest and if you are about 30" you might feel some stacking.

Given the way those limbs react, you may find that a slightly lighter and weaker arrow really brings the bow to life. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> B -
> 
> Three under certainly won't be a problem.
> We all know that most good bows in that weight should be adequate for deer sized animals, but if your DL is longer, better. (Forget the wingspan thing.)
> ...


What would be a good way to measure my draw length then to get a more accurate measurement? 

I’ll probably order an arrow test kit from 3rivers archery to figure out what arrows the bow likes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

The only real way to know your draw length is with a bow, and preferably a very light one (ie a draw check bow) and a graduated (marked) arrow. 
In lieu of that, you can use your bow and a long arrow, draw to anchor and have some one mark the arrow were it passes the back of the riser. 
You can approximate that by doing the exercise with the bow unstrung. 

Those arrow test kits are pretty popular, and IMHO, totally unnecessary. 
With a known bow type, of know draw weight and draw length, you can get an arrow that will be close enough to tune.

And for the record, to tune, as in really find out what arrow you need, you'll need at least 3 - 4 matched arrows. 
But, you're not there yet. 

Right now, you just need something that will shoot and not come out sideways.

For a first pass, if your DL is near 28/29" use full length 1816s, and if it's closer to 30", go with 1916s. 
Use the cheapest flavor you can find. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> B -
> 
> The only real way to know your draw length is with a bow, and preferably a very light one (ie a draw check bow) and a graduated (marked) arrow.
> In lieu of that, you can use your bow and a long arrow, draw to anchor and have some one mark the arrow were it passes the back of the riser.
> ...


I’ll have to have someone mark that for me and get a better check. Is the measurement taken from the back of the bow or the deepest point of the grip like with brace hight?

In the off chance that I️ find carbon shafts at a better price I️ should look at roughly a 750 spine? From what I️ can find a 1816 is right in that ballpark as far as spine is concerned.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Mark the arrow directly above the deepest point of the grip. That measurement from the groove of the nock PLUS 1 3/4" gives you YOUR draw length. Do it several times.

Your actual arrow length should probably be at least an inch longer than your draw length. Once you have all the numbers (marked bow weight, your draw length and actual desired arrow length), then we can make spine and point weight suggestions.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Stash said:


> Mark the arrow directly above the deepest point of the grip. That measurement from the groove of the nock PLUS 1 3/4" gives you YOUR draw length. Do it several times.
> 
> Your actual arrow length should probably be at least an inch longer than your draw length. Once you have all the numbers (marked bow weight, your draw length and actual desired arrow length), then we can make spine and point weight suggestions.


So my “draw length” is the deep point of the grip to the arrow nock PLUS 1 3/4”? 

Okay, I’ll give that a shot the and see where I️ end up at.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

According to AMO, that's how the manufactures are supposed to measure the bow.
It's pretty irrelevant for you, since the exact weight isn't an issue, arrow length is.
Besides, unless you mark the riser directly over the pivot point of the grip, it might be pretty tricky to do ... 

For a new shooter, mark from the back of the bow (side AWAY from you) and add about 1" for safety (if possible).

Viper1 out.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Viper1 said:


> 3D -
> 
> I have three Javes and each has slightly different riser dimensions and therefore mass.
> I also have a number of Damon Howatt Hunters with different grip contours, shelf configurations and riser lamination strips and even woods - does that make them different bows?
> ...


You are confusing different packages with models. The model is a Camaro, the package is SS, Z28 etc. Not one would confuse a Base Camaro with an SS or even an SS with a Z28. While they share the name, and certain parts, they are quite different to drive.
I have Seven Colts, Three Pinto's, Two Palomino's Three Collegians, Two Mustangs, A Javelina, I can tell each apart from how they feel and shoot. They are similar in looks, but are quite different.
For the difference in bow woods and such aspects of a bow, that is production variance, which is the norm when something is built by hand.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

MadJD said:


> I think its just how a bow gets marketed. Matters little except for how it was originally sold as which I find interesting.
> 
> This your youtube channel 3D? https://www.youtube.com/user/gmr12508
> 
> JD.


That would be me.


----------



## MadJD (Oct 25, 2017)

3D Archery said:


> That would be me.


Just watched your Colt Model 960 video. Excellent! 

Good to have someone here with actual hands on experience. :thumbs_up


----------



## fallhunt (Aug 2, 2013)

3D Archery said:


> I have Seven Colts, Three Pinto's, Two Palomino's Three Collegians, Two Mustangs, A Javelina, ..........


I am not trying to brag or shame you, but I noted that your collection is lacking the finest of the Ben Pearson bows. I on the other hand have both a 1966 Ben Pearson Pony and a 1970 Ben Pearson Super Jet. Yeah, I can feel your envy!
Just kidding – LOL.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

3D - 

So, you're basing your statements on a handful of entry level bows? Cool.
The only possible exceptions might be the Pinto/Palomino, and that was on the Intermediate list. 
I assume you know/have BP's high end stuff. 

Sure, most early production bows had different "feels", even the same model/weight rigs with consecutive serial numbers, but you're way over stating what they are. 

While I have fond memories of the Colts and Javes, and will usually recommend them to some people, I'm just a little more honest about it. 
They are in no way up to level of Pearson's higher end offering, and as much as it bothers me to say, not even close to good current offerings. 

Anywho, to each his own. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Thanks for all the great information and advice so far guys. 

Viper1 and 3D - I do understand that you guys are very passionate about traditional archery and your preferred bows but let’s not be condescending or petty. I️ value both of your opinions and hope that this thread can continue to accumulate whatever wisdom you guys are willing to impart.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

fallhunt said:


> I am not trying to brag or shame you, but I noted that your collection is lacking the finest of the Ben Pearson bows. I on the other hand have both a 1966 Ben Pearson Pony and a 1970 Ben Pearson Super Jet. Yeah, I can feel your envy!
> Just kidding – LOL.


You have me on the Pony. I do have several Power jets and a Couple of Super jets. I have one a model 334 Power Jet Fiberglass Long Bow that I just love to shoot. Yes, I'm envious of the pony.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Viper1 said:


> 3D -
> 
> So, you're basing your statements on a handful of entry level bows? Cool.
> The only possible exceptions might be the Pinto/Palomino, and that was on the Intermediate list.
> ...


Allow me to reword it for you. Pony cars are all of a similar design, though similar, they are different. The same for his bows, his recurves are of a similar design, but they are different. 

The first generation Palomino was his top of the line bow and Ben himself was very proud of all the Championships that it won. They did make the "Sovereign" line which was their top of the line bows in the 60's.
And yes, I have them and shot them. I have also talked to Ben's son about his bows and to the people that actually made the bows and even a few of the people who helped design them. I make no effort to hide the fact that I like his bows and I still shoot well with them even though most are 50 plus years old now. You say honest, okay. as you say to each their own.


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

3D -

Sorry, but if you believe that, then you know little about cars or bows, or just giving your opinions.

The reality is that there's little difference between performance cars in any given $$ and HP ranges. 
I have my favorites, but understand that each manufacturer may have different theories on performance, but the net result is pretty much the same.

Bows are indeed exactly the same. With a few exceptions, most bows of a give era and "level" have very similar performance profiles. 
BP's greatest contribution to archery was the fact that they prided themselves on producing bows that could be afforded by most anyone.
As I said, they took intelligent production shortcuts and put out a good product. 

BP might have been up there in the 60's, but by the mid 70's, even their Mercury bows (both target and hunting), which I really like, were no match for the Hoyt's and a few others. They became scarcer and scarcer on most target lines. Unfortunately, after that they made a few decision plunders and were beaten out by their competition. It's a shame, but it happened. 

So you like Pearsons? Great, so do I but I'm honest enough to rate where they belong. Better than some and worse than others. 
They were good solid bows, but nothing special. Still serviceable and certainly enjoyable, they do not hold up to most current issue bows. Few if any vintage bows do. 

And btw, your same spiel could be (and has been) said by any other fan boy for any other company. 

I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I just don't like people getting bad information. 

Viper1 out.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Viper1 said:


> 3D -
> 
> Sorry, but if you believe that, then you know little about cars or bows, or just giving your opinions.
> 
> ...


I will happily compare our knowledge of cars anyday. So you think there is little difference in cars? As a licensed race car driver in the SCCA and IMSA, I would have to disagree. But what would I know about driving a car right?

I have not shouted out fanboy support, I have pointed out things that you stated as truth as being questionable at best. Like saying the Second Generation of the Javelina is really a semi-recurve. Or its place in the BP line up. That the Palomino was not one of his top of the lines bows. Sorry that you do not like to be questioned or corrected. Inaccurate information is bad information, I was just ensuring that your gave the correct information.

I know what a BP bow is and is not. I have never claimed them to be anything but what they are, that is simply you inferring incorrectly.

So as you said "The reality is that there's little difference between performance cars in any given $$ and HP ranges"? Okay, so a 2017 Volkswagen GTI that goes for 24,995 has little performance difference than a 2017 Mustang at 25,185 or a 2017 Camaro at 25,905? Yeah, I would take that one. Now a VW Golf GTI (Mk VII) with Randy Pobst driving lapped Willow Springs in 1.50.11 While the same driver in a Camaro did it in 1.39.00 and a nobody driving the same car did it in 1.45.70. Yep no difference. Maybe that is why they make all those different classes in racing, because their is no performance difference!


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

3D - 

You know exactly what I'm saying are making little more than strawman argument, based on your preferences or rather prejudices. 
With production cars, there's very little difference between current issue Camaros, Mustangs, Challengers or whatever, as long as you compare apples to apples to apples. Ditto for their vintage counterparts.
I haven't races in years, but with maturity you learn the difference between reality and marketing hype. And thanks for making my point - the Willow Springs numbers you quoted mean next to nothing in real daily world driving. Go to a difference race track on a different day with different tunes on the cars and you'll see different results - again comparing apples to apples.

I trust you understand what a strawman is.

This has gone to far for this forum, but I'm sure you need to have to last word, so go for it.

Viper1 out.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Viper1 said:


> 3D -
> 
> but with maturity


Maturity ........ from you? Good one.


----------



## Stash (Jun 1, 2002)

Both of you, please give it a rest.

Thanks.


----------



## 3D Archery (May 19, 2016)

Stash said:


> Both of you, please give it a rest.
> 
> Thanks.


I'm done. 

3D Archery Out


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Okay guys, so to get back on topic a bit. Haha. I️ should be running a 700 to 800 spine arrow in this bow. I️ plan to hunt with it and will probably use a 200 to 250 grain 2 blade so should I️ drop my spine down to 600 or so to accommodate such a heavy tip? 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Viper1 (Aug 21, 2003)

B - 

Ah, no. Sorry, while a decent bow, throwing a 200 - 250 gr BH on a shaft stiff enough to give you a usable spine will turn the bow into a real dog. 
Most (OK all) of the Pearsons I own do not like heavy arrows. In fact, there were a few I was going to get rid of because they were such poor performers. Dropping in spine and total arrow weight really woke them up. 

I would use an 1816 with a 125 grain head and tune to taste. That should put you in the 400+ grain range, giving you a > 10 gr/lb arrow, which is pretty good. It's actually been a prtty common recipe for quite some time.

Viper1 out.


----------



## Burtjb (Nov 26, 2014)

Viper1 said:


> B -
> 
> Ah, no. Sorry, while a decent bow, throwing a 200 - 250 gr BH on a shaft stiff enough to give you a usable spine will turn the bow into a real dog.
> Most (OK all) of the Pearsons I own do not like heavy arrows. In fact, there were a few I was going to get rid of because they were such poor performers. Dropping in spine and total arrow weight really woke them up.
> ...


Awesome, I’ll try some 125 grain field points to start on 700’s and go from there. I’ve already got the 17 yard range set up in the basement to practice on through the winter months here in Missouri. Well see how comfortable I️ am come next September for deer archery season. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## MadJD (Oct 25, 2017)

Stash said:


> Both of you, please give it a rest.
> 
> Thanks.


Thanks a lot. Was entertaining until you stuck your big nose in.


----------

