Limbs UUkha VX1000 vs UX100 - any advantage?

EVC

New member
Looking at Uukha's web site I noticed that speed wise the top of the line VX1000 are not better than the new UX100. Any reason to spend the extra money with the VX1000? Allegedly the xcurve version is smoother but my experience with Border limbs makes me very sceptical abot such claims (no rant intended).
 

buzz lite beer

Well-known member
I thought I read that the VX1000's are 8 fps faster than the ux100's or are you referencing the Curve versions? I wouldn't be at all surprised that some of the figures are confused "lost in translation" so to speak :)
 

steve Morley

New member
It will be interesting to hear from Archers who have shot both, real world differences and not the sales hype :poulies:
 

EVC

New member
I thought I read that the VX1000's are 8 fps faster than the ux100's or are you referencing the Curve versions? I wouldn't be at all surprised that some of the figures are confused "lost in translation" so to speak :)
That was my first thought to but...

Vx1000 Curve are designed with the new Curve profile... bla bla bla ....
Vx1000 Curve limbs are faster (about 8 fps, equivalent to a gain of 3# at 40 #) and lighter than previous Ux100.
Ux100 Curve are designed with the new Curve profile.

Ux100 Curve limbs are faster (about 8 fps, equivalent to a gain of 3# at 40 #) and lighter than previous Ux100.
Copy and paste curse? If not, why spend the extra money? IMO "smoothness" is not such a good reason as it is more a matter of perception (I doubt it would pass a blind test).
 

Whitehart

Well-known member
Looking at Uukha's web site I noticed that speed wise the top of the line VX1000 are not better than the new UX100. Any reason to spend the extra money with the VX1000? Allegedly the xcurve version is smoother but my experience with Border limbs makes me very sceptical abot such claims (no rant intended).
Where did you read that?

Been a bit busy but I am currently shooting VX1000's

Before I was shooting UX100's why I did not put my results through a chrono I don't know......I will eventually

Everything was set up the same in regard to draw weight, I set my vx's to my UX100 70m sight mark and using the VX1000's (x-curve) the arrows went a foot over the top of the target.
 

Newbie

New member
tradtalk have a review of Vx1000 by aerosenfield, He had Ux100, Vx1000 and [FONT=verdana, geneva, lucida, lucida grande, arial, helvetica, sans-serif]Hex6 W, but not [/FONT]same draw weight.

search google with "
aerosenfield vx1000".

Regards
 

Whitehart

Well-known member
Copy and paste curse? If not, why spend the extra money? IMO "smoothness" is not such a good reason as it is more a matter of perception (I doubt it would pass a blind test).
I think it would, but interestingly some top archers have found them (vx1000 with x-curve) too smooth, hence the 2015 range has 2 versions of the VX1000 one the current VX1000 limb profile now called the x- curve and the others with the 2015 enhanced limb profile of the rest of the range called the curve still smoother.

VX1000's are as good as 100% carbon so very light.

There is also more to it than just the limb profile such as the tortional stiffness (which Slo mo suggests has an effect by reducing hand torque as well as all the other well documented benefits), and limb construction that cannot delaminate and finally these limbs (all of the range) don't fall to pieces or loose performance in extreme heat humidity or cold - end of sales pitch :)
 

EVC

New member
Where did you read that?

Been a bit busy but I am currently shooting VX1000's

Before I was shooting UX100's why I did not put my results through a chrono I don't know......I will eventually

Everything was set up the same in regard to draw weight, I set my vx's to my UX100 70m sight mark and using the VX1000's (x-curve) the arrows went a foot over the top of the target.
Hi Andrew, I meant the VX1000 are not better speed wise than the new UX100, based on the claims I quoted in the post right above yours. Both models are claimed being torsionally stiff.
 

Whitehart

Well-known member
Hi Andrew, I meant the VX1000 are not better speed wise than the new UX100, based on the claims I quoted in the post right above yours. Both models are claimed being torsionally stiff.
As far as I am aware nobody but the factory (and not sure what they have) have the new 2015 UX100's (they launch in Sept) and uukha are shut all of August I doubt anyone has that information other than uukha and we have not been told anything (we usually are) - could be wrong.... I will ask but it would be really surprising if the VX1000's were not faster - so far to-date when people say the limbs are not performing well it is because they have not set them up correctly.

The 2014 UX100's were from my testing speed wise on a par with W&W EX Powers so not surprised with buzz's comments as the winnex seem pretty close to the EX's.
 

sreynolds

New member
You would think that someone -- perhaps a national Olympic organization -- would see value in having a system for doing unbiased technical evaluation of equipment. Why are we stuck with manufacturers' claims and sloppy anecdotal user comparisons? (Yes, that's a bit unfair. Some individuals are actually quite thorough and professional, limited only by the gear and test equipment available to them.) The mechanical characteristics of a set of limbs are not difficult to measure if you have the right equipment. It's fun for us to argue about the subjective merits of various limbs, but it would sure be nice if we could start with good objective data in hand. Things like draw force curves and arrow speed curves should be standard information available for every limb produced. Then individual archers could more easily make their subjective judgments as to what works best for them.
 

JohnK

Well-known member
Sreynolds - Wouldn't that be fantastic? Unfortunately, while the big companies can hand out bin bags full of limbs and arrows to national team staff[1], it won't happen.

Individual top archers will nearly always take the best kit that comes with a good sponsorship deal. Who can blame them? It's not as if they can make millions out of the sport, like a golfer or tennis player might.

[1] Yes, I saw that happen at the 2005 World Championships in Madrid.
 

BorderBows

New member
You would think that someone -- perhaps a national Olympic organization -- would see value in having a system for doing unbiased technical evaluation of equipment. Why are we stuck with manufacturers' claims and sloppy anecdotal user comparisons? (Yes, that's a bit unfair. Some individuals are actually quite thorough and professional, limited only by the gear and test equipment available to them.) The mechanical characteristics of a set of limbs are not difficult to measure if you have the right equipment. It's fun for us to argue about the subjective merits of various limbs, but it would sure be nice if we could start with good objective data in hand. Things like draw force curves and arrow speed curves should be standard information available for every limb produced. Then individual archers could more easily make their subjective judgments as to what works best for them.
gets messy when manufacturers put in coaching equipment into centres of excellence. Coaching is good for the national teams. but then what if their kit doesn't glow in the independent testing...
 

Timid Toad

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
You would think that someone -- perhaps a national Olympic organization -- would see value in having a system for doing unbiased technical evaluation of equipment. Why are we stuck with manufacturers' claims and sloppy anecdotal user comparisons? (Yes, that's a bit unfair. Some individuals are actually quite thorough and professional, limited only by the gear and test equipment available to them.) The mechanical characteristics of a set of limbs are not difficult to measure if you have the right equipment. It's fun for us to argue about the subjective merits of various limbs, but it would sure be nice if we could start with good objective data in hand. Things like draw force curves and arrow speed curves should be standard information available for every limb produced. Then individual archers could more easily make their subjective judgments as to what works best for them.
Some manufacturers could but don't want to - they might be embarrassed. Some can't afford to. Some spend everything on r&d, in the experience that the setting up, and method of shooting any one set up is so subjective and unique to the individual, it's pretty pointless.
 

Whitehart

Well-known member
Perhaps people should ask themselves what they want from a limb

Top archers do and probably top of the list is confidence that it can do its job shot after shot in all environments.

Some like slow and steady with a particular feel as they pull through the clicker.

Others ultra fast with a particular feel as they pull through the clicker.

and then there is everything else inbetween.

The good news is that there is a manufacturer out there that can offer you what you want, the hard part is actually setting it up correctly for you otherwise you might not get the benefits you were expecting.

Somebody asked about fps, this is not just a function of the limbs it is also the function of the string, tab material, archers form and arrows especially spine.

For example a customer shot his bow through a chrono and was disappointed by the speed I shot it to the same draw length and added 9fps.
 

BorderBows

New member
Perhaps people should ask themselves what they want from a limb

Top archers do and probably top of the list is confidence that it can do its job shot after shot in all environments.

Some like slow and steady with a particular feel as they pull through the clicker.

Others ultra fast with a particular feel as they pull through the clicker.

and then there is everything else inbetween.

The good news is that there is a manufacturer out there that can offer you what you want, the hard part is actually setting it up correctly for you otherwise you might not get the benefits you were expecting.

Somebody asked about fps, this is not just a function of the limbs it is also the function of the string, tab material, archers form and arrows especially spine.

For example a customer shot his bow through a chrono and was disappointed by the speed I shot it to the same draw length and added 9fps.
but if you shot the fast bow your arrow speed would still be faster than the other persons.
its not like your customer could walk out with your release....
but they can walk out with a faster bow if they were struggling with sight marks.
 

sreynolds

New member
gets messy when manufacturers put in coaching equipment into centres of excellence. Coaching is good for the national teams. but then what if their kit doesn't glow in the independent testing...
I guess the problem does come down to financial realities. No one wants to bite the hand that feeds them.
We'll just have to be grateful for the data that IS published and for the companies that go to the trouble of participating in these sorts of discussions.
 

darthTer

Active member
Supporter
Ironman
American Shoot
I don't think it would take much for each manufacturer to a agree a specific test and then publish the results accordingly.

example:
- set riser length with fixed limb-bolt position
- set limb length
- set marked limb weight
- set draw length
- set arrow spec

The only variable could be how it is shot. Obviously a mechanical method would be most consistent.

DFC's, chrono results, weight etc could all be published in a std format.

Based on the above, buys could accurately compare limbs based on standard info. the spec may not match their exact requirement, but it would give an indicator across the market.

This would require ALL limb manufacturers to agree to a std procedure - unfortunately I don't see that happening.
 
Top