Compound Bow Arrow spline

Craigx

New member
I have always wondered why compound archers match the arrow spline to the weight of the bow. As the arrow sits at the bow centre and does not require the archers paradox to get itself away from the bow why cant we just use the stiffest arrow available.
 

Aleatorian

Member
You can use the stiffest available, look up the pro's using GoldTip Triple X's for indoor/3D shooting (150 spine). However, the considerations to take are that your form has to be spot on (excuse the pun) as any movement you make can be exaggerated by the stiff arrow and in most cases the weight gets heavier as you go up the spine range. So if you want an arrow to use out to the 90m on the World Archery 1440 rounds, you may struggle to get the distance.

Not all bows the arrow sits dead center, so you do still get the flex, just not in a horizontal direction, unless you do something wrong. The arrow does need to recover otherwise you may have contact issue depending on rest type.
 

AndyW

Well-known member
Not everyone uses a release aid. You can get away with a lot more if you do but only to a point. As above, humans are only so good there will always be some inconsistencies.
You shoot the most advantageous set up for you, not anyone else. Just because J. Bloggs can get away with max diameter tree trunks doesn't mean you will. Yes they will cut a line but if you twitch they will punish you.
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
Goldtip triple X are not allowed max diameter 9.2mm. I use 2315's with 180 grain points. I think that the stiffness to weight of the arrow has a lot to do how twitchy it is.
 

Aleatorian

Member
Goldtip triple X are not allowed max diameter 9.2mm.
GT XXX of course aren't WA/AGB legal, but it was more to illustrate the point on stupidly stiff arrows. I myself am the same in using 2315 (340 spine) with 180 grain points for WA/AGB indoors, can also use CXL Pro 350's (354 spine) with a 120 grain points, however want some X-Busters 350's with a 120 grain point for indoors (over the 2315's)
 

Andy!

Active member
Compounds will shoot a wide range of spines with no problem and group just the same.
Going for the stiffest arrow possible just increases the chance of a heavy strike on the rest, depending on how high the nocking point is and the nock travel profile caused by the cams during the power stroke.
Archers paradox is something that you see, where in bows without centershot cut outs have the arrow pointing away from the target.
Archers paradox is NOT the arrow bending during the power stroke, despite what archers who should know better will tell you.
 

Craigx

New member
Thank you for the replies. As I suspected , keeping in mind arrow weight, you can shoot stiff arrows from a compound without detrimental effects. When shooting indoors over close range you may as well shoot the thickest and consequently the stiffest arrows allowed.
 
Last edited:

backinblack

Active member
But John Dudley thinks that there is some mileage to be gained from tweaking point weight to affect dynamic spine in compound shooting:

ARTICLE

The article is "Get the point". I've also read an article by him saying that having a correctly spined arrow could make a difference of 10 points or so on an indoor round for him - I can't seem to find that one now. Well, at least he believed that, though presumably he had worked through a number of options to arrive at that conclusion.

I know I torque the b'jeezus out of a compound bow and, whilst theoretically there should be no sideways action on a compound string/ arrow with a mechanical release, I wonder whether factoring the torque makes a difference and that there is perhaps an optimal choice of spine for the shooting characteristics of the individual archer (or there could be if they were consistent enough to know what that was).

Anyway, I don't know what the answer is, though I understand that Andy! has looked into it and from reading threads on Archery Talk, there may be some scientific research into the matter on the verge of being unveiled...c'mon Andy! dish the gossip!
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
I think that there might be a way to check whether or not your torqueing the bow is causing side ways reaction and that is to compare the impact point of a unfletched and fletched arrow. If there is some kind of paradox then the point of impact will be different. Unless of course the spine is correct.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Some time ago, I read something along the lines of .......
When you draw a compound, the limbs are pulled to one side by the cables running over to the cable guide or rollers.Some bows use a sprung cable guide to reduce the amount of pulling out of line.The guide bends instead of the limbs moving over to one side.
When you draw the bow, you may not notice. But if the limbs are pulled across to the guide, it can be said that the guide is pulled across to the limbs, and that torques the riser. You might not notice but the sight will be moving to one side with that movement.
That all sounds logical to me.
I think that some of that torque can be counter acted by holding the bow with the hand pressure aimed at a particular spot on the grip. That is achieved by shooting through paper and seeing what hand position gives least ripping.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Some time ago, I read something along the lines of .......
When you draw a compound, the limbs are pulled to one side by the cables running over to the cable guide or rollers.Some bows use a sprung cable guide to reduce the amount of pulling out of line.The guide bends instead of the limbs moving over to one side.
When you draw the bow, you may not notice. But if the limbs are pulled across to the guide, it can be said that the guide is pulled across to the limbs, and that torques the riser. You might not notice but the sight will be moving to one side with that movement.
That all sounds logical to me.
I think that some of that torque can be counter acted by holding the bow with the hand pressure aimed at a particular spot on the grip. That is achieved by shooting through paper and seeing what hand position gives least ripping.
 

Andy!

Active member
One of the biggest myths in archery is that you must have the arrows spined correctly for the best accuracy.
It's total ########.

You must have the arrows matched as best as possible for the best accuracy.
The only time you need the spine matched to the bow is if you desire the flight to be perfectly up and down so that you don't require windage adjustment if you chance distances.

If you aren't changing distances, like for indoor, then you don't have to worry too much about it.

If archery were a sport for scientists, there wouldn't be anywhere the amount of ignorance and myth that gets proported to exist.

I guarantee you that a lot of archers who are excellent shots wouldn't be game to put their opinions to paper, either.

To demonstrate how strong the ignorance is, and the hold it has, years ago, Dr James Park once did a live demonstration of shooting various spines through his hooter shooter.

They all grouped identically.
People who witnessed it said that it wasn't possible.

This refusal to accept actual evidence does not stop people posting their opinions on internet forums.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Heehee.Lovely post.
Humans;what are they like?
Interesting and programmed to find patterns?Sometimes the patterns they find are coincidental, but that doesn't stop us from assuming they/we are correct. Then we are prepared /programmed to defend them at all cost and beyond.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Heehee.Lovely post.
Humans;what are they like?
Interesting and programmed to find patterns?Sometimes the patterns they find are coincidental, but that doesn't stop us from assuming they/we are correct. Then we are prepared /programmed to defend them at all cost and beyond.
 

backinblack

Active member
Hi Andy,

I can accept that that would be the case with a compound bow on a Hooter Shooter but how does that stack up when we add in a variable: the human element and particularly with a finger release? Are you saying that James Park's theory applies to these circumstances as well?

It's well known that elite recurve archers spend a lot of time tweaking their set ups to get optimal grouping. They obviously shoot enough arrows to be able to tell (or believe) that having their kit set in a certain way either gains or helps them to not lose points in terms of group size rather than not having to adjust windage on a change of distance.

I believe that my recurve set-up groups better at a given bracing height and having cleaner arrow flight certainly appears to help at long range but I accept that the placebo effect is a powerful thing and I also wear my lucky underpants to tournaments...
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
One of the biggest myths in archery is that you must have the arrows spined correctly for the best accuracy.
It's total ########.

You must have the arrows matched as best as possible for the best accuracy.
The only time you need the spine matched to the bow is if you desire the flight to be perfectly up and down so that you don't require windage adjustment if you chance distances.

If you aren't changing distances, like for indoor, then you don't have to worry too much about it.
You may not have to, but I do. I can shoot at 30, 25 or 18 meters indoors. I go with the 2011 Easton Selector, heaviest points I can afford and tune for bullet holes, or just a 1/8th inch tail high.
I am not a hooter shooter and any results you get from one are not really applicable to 'real world' situations. I have read the 'get to the point' arcticle It's not about getting the perfect group, its about getting the most tolerant setup because groups don't score. I would rather have three line cutter tens than two prefect tens and a nine.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Jerry, can you adjust your bow's set up to give you three line cutter tens, then change the set up to give two perfect tens and a nine?
 

Andy!

Active member
I am not a hooter shooter and any results you get from one are not really applicable to 'real world' situations.
Now, you see.
This is the kind of idiotic tripe that gets peddled to the masses with an attempt at authority.

Justify what you said with actual evidence or just shut up and take your ######## somewhere else. I'm tired of having to deal with morons so this is your chance to prove you're have a clue or you just want to hide behind a simple statement that you can't back up.

It's really easy to write out and hope to god that nobody challenges it.

I'm going to wait in anticipation for this one because I expect that it's going to be full of more conjecture and anecdote. Because that's how you back up unproven opinion. With more of it.
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
THESE ARE GENUINE questions.
A hooter shooter will shoot arrows from a bow and have a very steady and repeatable aim, yes? It will release the string, and during the power stroke will have its own reaction, which will repeat time after time unless changes are made to the arrows or the bow fitted to its support mechanism, yes?
If the arrows all group together we can say that A) the arrows are well matched to each other, for weight (and possibly other parameters) yes?
B) the hooter shooter is using a bow that is shooting consistently shot after shot.Yes?
With different arrows, matched to each other, but not matched so well to the bow (according to spine charts) the same tight groups result, showing that the bow can perform very well even using arrows that some might consider to be less than ideal.... or... not recommended.
If the same bow and same arrows are used by an archer, the results are likely to be less good, the archer will vary in some ways on each shot and get results to match those variations. The hooter shooter shows that the variations are the result of the archer's weaknesses, not the equipment.
So, the archer then turns to the set up of the bow, in the belief( possibly) that a different setting will give them better results than previously, though never better than the machine shot ones. OR the archer then works on their form to reduce the damage caused by their variations.
My question is, how realistic is it to assume that a different set up will give better results?
The idea seems to stem from thinking that some set ups can reduce the damaging effect of their worst mistakes, or their most frequent mistakes.
It does seem to me that "Fine tuning" is done by better archers to find some setting that works better for them than other set ups.
Is this a recurve thing? Does it work for recurves and not for compounds with release aids?
 
Top