# String Material



## bsp5019 (Oct 1, 2007)

What string material are you guys using for strings now? I typically use BCY X when getting new strings made for my compounds, but I was wondering if there is a better material to use or a more standard Oly. recurve material that everyone is using. I've had strings made of 8125 in the past and didn't know if this was still a popular choice.

Thanks


----------



## PNWMaker (Feb 7, 2019)

On my recurve setup I'm on BCY X because that's what 60x recommends and some of my teammates shoot on, but many of them also love 8125g. At some point I'm gonna make a string out of each and see what difference I can feel. If I remember correctly 8125 had some materials that were a little stretchier than the newer BCY X, not really sure of the effect that has.


----------



## Bolla (Feb 27, 2019)

Does anyone out ther still use D-97 on thier recurves? I realize there are better offerings at this point but just wondered. I still have a bunch of it so its what im shooting at the moment.


----------



## williamskg6 (Dec 21, 2008)

Bolla said:


> Does anyone out ther still use D-97 on thier recurves? I realize there are better offerings at this point but just wondered. I still have a bunch of it so its what im shooting at the moment.


I'm using D-97. It's inexpensive and works nearly as well as 8125G for my purposes.


----------



## bsp5019 (Oct 1, 2007)

I haven't purchased a new string in about 14 years (just recently purchased a riser to start shooting again. Shot compound in between). Everything I have is old fast flight, and while that probably still works, I was just wondering if any of the newer materials are drastically better than older, more tried materials.


----------



## Seattlepop (Dec 8, 2003)

Bolla said:


> Does anyone out ther still use D-97 on thier recurves? I realize there are better offerings at this point but just wondered. I still have a bunch of it so its what im shooting at the moment.


D-97 is the same strand material as 8125, just thicker strands. 14 strand D-97 vs 16 strand 8125. Angel Majesty is a fav, but imho D-97 is a close second and a bargain at that.


----------



## EvilGarfield (May 30, 2018)

Bcy mercury here

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk


----------



## j.conner (Nov 12, 2009)

Bolla said:


> Does anyone out ther still use D-97 on thier recurves? I realize there are better offerings at this point but just wondered. I still have a bunch of it so its what im shooting at the moment.


I use D97 - great string material and less expensive too. I think that 8125 came into favor primarily because that is what shops have on-hand for compounds.


----------



## camperjim (Oct 22, 2016)

I am another D97 user. I have tried other materials but failed to see any performance advantages, just higher costs.


----------



## Bender (Dec 6, 2006)

I like my BCY-X. As the SK 90 Dyneema used in it has been discontinued, it is being phased out for X-99 which uses SK 99. Whatever, either way, I just like my Dyneema/Vectran blends due to shot feel. You see when it comes to performance gains, shooting single string finger release, we're probably not going to see a whole lot of difference between the various HMPE based materials. 

Now shot feel is very subjective, but it can be an easily detectable difference. So, do you have a material where you like how it makes the bow feel upon release? Do you like the strand count and nock fit you get? Cool! Shoot THAT stuff!


----------



## lees (Feb 10, 2017)

I don't shoot recurve anymore, but BCY D97 was my go-to material when I was making strings for it. In fact, about the only materials I found I didn't particularly like on recurve were 8125G and 452X. 8125G (not 8125) made the bow really loud for no apparent reason and 452X did the same, tho to a lesser degree. I suspect it's the GORE material in 8125G that was the culprit, and 452X has a lot of Vectran in it which seems to do the same thing.

I didn't find they put the bow in any danger, but I didn't shoot those materials long enough to see if anything was going to come apart, so....

Basically, any Dyneema/Spectra based pure material will probably be fine, but I preferred D97 because it was inexpensive.

lee.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

8125G or X.


----------



## hamnguyen (Apr 1, 2014)

On a lot of recurves shooters I shoot with run BCY 8125G. I used to run it as well until I turned to BCY 652. I found it to react softer and springy and to be more forgiving than 8125G. Also made my bow sound awesome haha.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

652 is pure spectra, much the same as fast flight. it is not as stable and our brace height will vary during shooting.


----------



## Timevoid (Aug 19, 2018)

Just a note. The "X" strings contains certain amount % of vectran. This is recomended for Compound due to low creep at higher ambient temps and higher static load. Its not so favorable for recurve bows.
When running pure 100% UHMWPE/Dynema more strands then "Vectran blend" can be needed to stop the creep. Higher temps and load increse the creep for pure UHMWPE/Dynema. 

Bcy have a good overview what the string materials contain. 
http://www.bcyfibers.com/Bowstring.php


----------



## drolander1 (Aug 8, 2016)

Is anybody shooting the Angel Majesty 777? It works well for me bit I haven’t experimented much with other string materials. The lonly review I found on the web is someone who had a Flemish twist string (against the manufacturers recommendation) made from 777 and found out that it doesn’t work. (Like the manufacturer said)


----------



## bluedevil49 (Jun 22, 2012)

drolander1 said:


> Is anybody shooting the Angel Majesty 777? It works well for me bit I haven’t experimented much with other string materials. The lonly review I found on the web is someone who had a Flemish twist string (against the manufacturers recommendation) made from 777 and found out that it doesn’t work. (Like the manufacturer said)


I've been shooting AM777 for close to a year now. Definitely prefer it over 8125G which I was shooting for 5 years. Loving the fact that I don't have to wax it.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

I've recently burned through 4 rolls of AM for a couple of high performance recurvers. I prefer 8125G, and I really am baffled as to how the 20 seconds required to maintain a string after every couple of sessions is an impediment.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

EvilGarfield said:


> Bcy mercury here
> 
> Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk


Might be the best stuff going but when LAS discounted 8190F I bought tons of it. For heavier bows and large groove nocks, I Like 8125 or D97 or D10 (now called force Ten) but for smaller kids, I like 8190F since I can use more strands and that gets me a rounder, stronger string (20 Strands of 8190F with .18 Power grip or .19 HALO is perfect for the small groove G nock or the small groove bohning blazer pin nock), then I get with 12 strands of D87 or 14 strands of 8125.


----------



## drolander1 (Aug 8, 2016)

caspian said:


> I've recently burned through 4 rolls of AM for a couple of high performance recurvers. I prefer 8125G, and I really am baffled as to how the 20 seconds required to maintain a string after every couple of sessions is an impediment.


What is it about the 8125G that you like better?


----------



## SHPoet (Nov 13, 2009)

I use 8190 and really like it. Just a little stretch at the beginning then it settles in and doesn't move. Actually, on a recurve, I don't think it makes much real difference on this side of the world.


----------



## tim.long (Jul 4, 2015)

j.conner said:


> I use D97 - great string material and less expensive too. I think that 8125 came into favor primarily because that is what shops have on-hand for compounds.


It's cheaper by $0.004 per foot. It's the same material, and effectively the same pricewise, aside from the string thickness.


----------



## a99f01 (Jun 28, 2014)

I've been a D97 person for years, but as JimC mentions when LAS discounted the 8190F I took a gamble and stocked up. This 8190F is very good for the 20-30 lbs bows, being smaller diameter it does take a bit more stands but allows for a rounder string. Not sure it actually makes a difference on the shot, well a lot of that come from confort between the two ears :wink:


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

drolander1 said:


> What is it about the 8125G that you like better?


I find it bundles better, and seems a little softer on the shot, despite having no creep - especially if given a bit of a stretch during building.

mostly, I don't like the resin. wax has a purpose in string maintenance, and the resin is not a replacement. wax lubricates, helps hold bundles together for handling off the bow, and prevents abrasion against chest guards. unwaxed AM just frays, and if you're going to wax it anyway, then why not just use 8125G?


----------



## j.conner (Nov 12, 2009)

tim.long said:


> It's cheaper by $0.004 per foot. It's the same material, and effectively the same pricewise, aside from the string thickness.


$15 more for a 1/8# spool and thinner threads means more strands per bow string (25% more used).


----------



## camperjim (Oct 22, 2016)

For anyone interested, LAS has reduced price promotions on BCY strings for the month of April.


----------



## gilbertj (Jan 9, 2015)

I'll throw another option into the mix, Brownell FastFlight+, have shot 8125 and 8125G in the past. FF+ I've found to be overall more forgiving and quieter.


----------



## tunedlow (Nov 7, 2012)

drolander1 said:


> Is anybody shooting the Angel Majesty 777? It works well for me bit I haven’t experimented much with other string materials. The lonly review I found on the web is someone who had a Flemish twist string (against the manufacturers recommendation) made from 777 and found out that it doesn’t work. (Like the manufacturer said)


Shooting it close to two years now. Used the predecessor before that alongside BCY 8125G. I switched to Angel exclusively for my string and serve with BCY.


----------



## archerynooblol (Nov 6, 2010)

j.conner said:


> $15 more for a 1/8# spool and thinner threads means more strands per bow string (25% more used).


I saw this getting repeated several times in this thread. Wanted to see if that was correct.

Here are the numbers.









*Facts:*

8125G is more expensive by $0.01 per foot regardless of spool size.
How you utilize the rolls will determine whether or not the stock 8125G roll will give you more or less strings compared to the D97 roll. (Don't think the strand diameter is readily available, so I can't speak to what's the circumscribed equivalent strand count).

Let me know if someone finds an issue with the numbers.

Hope that helps. 

Cheers,

AN


----------



## camperjim (Oct 22, 2016)

8125 is a thinner version of D97 so if you want equivalent strength you need to use the same amount of material by weight. 8125 is substantially more expensive by weight. In addition, my strings seem to wear out in one of two ways. The string eventually frays or the serving wears out. I have never had to replace end serving, but I have had a couple of cases where I replaced center serving. The main reason for replacing a string is fraying. When fraying becomes a noticeable issue it is worse for thin stranded strings. A thick string has to become much more frayed to be in danger of breaking strands.


----------



## archerynooblol (Nov 6, 2010)

camperjim said:


> 8125 is a thinner version of D97 so if you want equivalent strength you need to use the same amount of material by weight.


That's true, but functionally doesn't matter. I would bet the breaking strength of a single strand of each is above the forces of what you see in the string on a bow. I'd have the find that number to be sure, but that's why the recommended strand counts are similar.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

a single strand of fast flight has a breaking strain of 100lb. I've seen a longbow shot with a single strand of it, obviously it wasn't very stable but the biggest immediate problem is that it was slicing into the limb nocks!

I've also seen a 60lb compound with a cable chewed by a cracked cable slide, there were 4 strands left when I replaced it. as a general rule the cables see about 5x the draw weight on a modern compound.

I would be very surprised if anyone is actively shooting with a string that has any chance of breaking, it would look like a cat's tail. I do agree that the main reason for replacement is fraying, and the main reason for fraying is lack of waxing. far more strings are replaced due to lack of simple maintenance than genuine unavoidable wear.


----------



## archeryal (Apr 16, 2005)

I have some D-75 thin, which I've heard is similar to 8125. True? 

I've got enough to last me into my next life. I assume that it won't degrade just by sitting around.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

it's 100% HMPE, but likely an older formulation. I doubt you would notice any practical difference other than the strands are slightly thicker, so you need 16 strands to 18 of 8125. keep sealed in a reasonable temperature controlled environment and it will last longer that you or I will.


----------



## lcaillo (Jan 5, 2014)

I have some old fast flight, some AM, and some BCY-X and have made a variety of strings with various strand counts with all of them. At my level of shooting I can't tell much difference. I'm shooting the BCY-X now because it is the latest build. Perhaps with greater draw weight there might be more difference. I only hold 36-40#.


----------



## caspian (Jan 13, 2009)

draw weight doesn't play much of a factor, at least for the draw weights that recurvers use. where the difference comes in is stability (maintains brace height) and speed, plus the need for a better bow tune as the modulus of the string increases.

most of the need for ultra-stable materials is in compound cables that see around 300lb tension, but it's not at all unusual to see 8125 used for a compound string at 60lb peak draw weight, and it's quite stable there.


----------

