# 8190 and recurves



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

I'm using both 8190 and Brownell Fury. For whatever reason, I much prefer the Fury, easier to build with, and after I put some twists in it, gets very round. Much tougher than Majesty.

I hadn't had much luck with 8190 until I started stripping off some of the massive excess wax. As soon as I did that, the bundle got much rounder and I ended up with good strings. 

I shoot high strand counts on both, so I can't tell if one is louder than the other.


----------



## MickeyBisco (Jul 14, 2012)

Cal- thanks! By high strand count do you mean 24+ on the 8190? I've had good luck with roundness after a good burnishing as well.


----------



## bobnikon (Jun 10, 2012)

Shooting 8125 and 8190, and cant tell a lot of difference. I would have to check strings, but I know there are more strands in my 8190, and there was more burnishing untill wax stopped coming off.


----------



## itbeso (Jul 6, 2005)

I started off shooting 8190 on my recurves. A friend made me a string with D97 and I would never go back. Softer feel after shot and great consistency arrow after arrow.


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER (Jan 17, 2003)

I'm using 8190 on my recurve, 24 strands. So far I love it. The string I have is very quiet in my bow.


----------



## TREESTANDSNYPER (Jan 17, 2003)

I use D97 on my trad recurves.


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

What are the observed advantages of D97 versus 8125?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

lksseven said:


> What are the observed advantages of D97 versus 8125?


not much except a standard D97 string is 14 strands rather than 22/24 meaning its easier to get the strand tension even. I find with 24 strands of 8190 I have to use real thin HALO for a decent nock fit while 8125 at 18 strands uses .19 HALO-same with 14 strands of D97. I use 97 or the D 10 (AKA "Force 10) when I am in a hurry. If I have time to let the string sit on the jig overnight to stretch out I use 8125 or 8190. 8190 generally .17 or .14 for a good nock fit


----------



## lksseven (Mar 21, 2010)

Thanks, Jim.


----------



## Corene1 (Apr 27, 2014)

itbeso said:


> I started off shooting 8190 on my recurves. A friend made me a string with D97 and I would never go back. Softer feel after shot and great consistency arrow after arrow.


 I have to agree with you. Don Rabska was coaching my son in the late 1990's and showed us how he built strings using Dynaflight 97. They may be 2 or 3 fps slower than 8190 but they are very consistent shot after shot.


----------



## swbuckmaster (Dec 20, 2005)

Why would you build a string out of 8190 for a recurve and use 24 strand string? 8190 is a stronger material so you don't need as many strands. Go with less strands and use thicker serving and you will have a faster string and softer shot. I also don't know how you can't get a smooth round, shiny string. All you have to do is get a chamois cloth at wall-mart for 2 bucks and run it down the string one time and it will be shiny and round.


----------



## MickeyBisco (Jul 14, 2012)

Corene1 said:


> I have to agree with you. Don Rabska was coaching my son in the late 1990's and showed us how he built strings using Dynaflight 97. They may be 2 or 3 fps slower than 8190 but they are very consistent shot after shot.


From Ben's post, I built a 16 str D97 and an 8190 20 str today. I'll do some testing tomorrow. Pretty sure Don still builds with D97, too.


Thanks to all for the continued dialogue.


----------



## Georgemay (May 27, 2008)

Last month I met Don at High Performance Coaching Seminar, and we talk about string materials a lot. He still likes D97 and equally 8190. The only difference that for 8190 he likes 22 strands. The other top coach mentioned Trophy string material with which he did extensive testing. He found it as being very stable, quiet, low vibration, and very durable as well. A lot of top archers are using it, Butch Johnson is using it, Marcus D' Almeida as well... It is worth to look into especially if you have weak arrow situation. Trophy is a little heavier than D97 so you may have another option there. It will slow down your arrow few fps but as they say... it is better to have slow 10 than fast 9.
George


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

Hey Mickey,

I'm using 24 strands, and 0.017 halo for beiter #2 nocks. As JimC indicated, it is a bit tough to get even string tension due to the high strand count vs D97 or 8125. However, Fury takes even more strands for me, 26 or 28 (I can't remember...), and yet it builds a rounder string. 

I'm getting to the point that I'll stick to 8190 and Fury and just keep making the best strings I can, as I can't tell whether one is costing me points or not.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

calbowdude said:


> Hey Mickey,
> 
> I'm using 24 strands, and 0.017 halo for beiter #2 nocks. As JimC indicated, it is a bit tough to get even string tension due to the high strand count vs D97 or 8125. However, Fury takes even more strands for me, 26 or 28 (I can't remember...), and yet it builds a rounder string.
> 
> I'm getting to the point that I'll stick to 8190 and Fury and just keep making the best strings I can, as I can't tell whether one is costing me points or not.


Let the strands sit on the jig for several hours-or a whole day if possible. the strands even out


----------



## calbowdude (Feb 13, 2005)

I need to try that let-the-string-sit trick. Now to figure out where to leave the jig.


----------



## MickeyBisco (Jul 14, 2012)

The 8190 string I shot today was 20 str, with a 2 strand extra buildup under the .019 Halo for a clean snap with a Beiter #2. I also played with a D97, but at 16 strands I had to center serve with .014 for the same fit. I'll make the next one from 14 strands. I'm certainly not as discerning as Ben, and they felt quite similar with both limbs I used. The 8190 grouped better for me, and was a bit snappier sounding, but the previous noise issues have been remedied with a better, less tight fitting center.


----------



## zal (May 1, 2007)

I tried 8190, didn't like it. There was a lot of wax on the string material.

I've tried a lot of different materials and always come back to original Angel Dyneema with Dyneema servings, it gives me fast, very quiet, soft feeling and after the initial shooting oin perioid extremely stable string, with servings that never break.

I still have one of those strings from about 2006 with more than 200,000 shots put through it while blank baling that I've kept just for testing how long they actually last.


----------



## steve morley (Dec 24, 2005)

I've used 8125 for a number of years, tried 8190 this year and can't tell any performance difference, in speed or noise. I've used D97 as well they all do the task required of them and I think most Archers if blindfolded could not tell the difference between these different strings.


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

I played with these two materials a bit in the last month. On my one setup I found the 8190 to be noticeably quieter (stringwalking) than the 8125. I used 22 strands 8190 and found the final size served tight with 0.21 majesty to be about the same as the 18 strands of 8125. Tune showed just a touch stiffer. Unfortunately I changed bow lengths since then and had only an 8125 string so I don’t have much shooting comparison. I just ordered another 8190 string.

I doubt I will notice any difference in scores. If it ends up to creep less and fuzz up less (both an issue with 8125 in my usage) than I would think I would stay with it. If it also shows quieter than that is another bonus.


----------



## HikerDave (Jan 1, 2011)

MickeyBisco said:


> So, I've been making strings obsessively recently, as well as absorbing the past threads here on 8125, D97 and the "new" 8190. Now that it's been out a few years, and folks have tried / compared it to 8125/g on recurves, what are the opinions?
> 
> I was discussing this with a friend, and the conversation centered around the extremely low stretch of SK90 vs the 75 in 8125/97, and what affect it might have on limbs. Myself, I've found the 8190 ( in similar diameter) to be a bit louder, but I admit my test group is far from scientific.
> 
> So? Who's using what, and why?


I went back to D97 after trying 8190 because my HPX/ Hex6H bow sounded much better with 16 strands of D97 / .014 halo serving than with the equivalent 8190 string.

If you make a string with 8190 make it about 1/4 inch longer because it won't stretch as much that first day after you put it on the bow.


----------



## Borja1300 (Oct 12, 2007)

From W&W website:

Q. What string material should I use?
A. We suggest materials like Angel Majesty and Dyneema, Fastflight, 8125, etc. We also discourage users from using materials like 452X, *8190X* and other materials that will put undue stress on the bow potentially leading to eventual damage. This is not an exclusive materials that you can use, just a suggestion of the types of strings that will and won't work with your bow.


----------



## MickeyBisco (Jul 14, 2012)

The post above illustrates the reason I started this thread. Thanks, Borja. 

I wonder how many sponsored W&W shooters use 8190?


----------



## SBills (Jan 14, 2004)

What is 8190X? Seems every time a new string material comes out the limb manufactures say don’t use this. Then within a few years it is the string of choice. I know people who have been using 452X for several years on recurves. Anyway I received my new 8190 string the other night and served it up. For me 22 strands finishes up with .021 majesty to a perfect fit for my super nocks. So I will plan to try it out along with the 8125 I have been using.


----------

