arrows scrapping down one side

blackarrow37

New member
hi my wife is tearing her hair out trying to find why her arrows are scrapping
on the berger button side of the arrows the thin arrow wraps on her arrows
seem to be getting a bad score line down them
could it be the button is set to weak??
the arrows are the correct spine 1516 easton xx75 platinums
her draw weight is 22 ibs the arrows are 26 inches long

thanks all any idea's please
 

Rik

Supporter
Supporter
Probably a bit stiff, and a clearance issue.

Clearance can be awkward. You can try: altering button position/tension. Raising the nocking point a little. Increasing the Bracing height (that's a double whammy - can improve clearance, and get a weaker reaction from the shafts).
 

mbaker74

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
Im going to disagree and say those arrows are too soft.....
The Easton chart for low poundage target at 26", 22lb shows Y4 which shows 1416 spine, BUT the low poundage chart is generally for kids shooting over long arrows.

The real chart shows 1516 spine XX75's only applicable at 24", 21-27 lb. As your arrows are 2 inches longer they are going to be far too soft.
The actual rating from the chart shows group 03 which does not have an XX75 spine in it. One group up would be 1713.
Personally, I would go 1713 and initially buy them at 27.5" long, the extra length then will bring them down a spine and allow for the fact your wife is shooting at the lower end of the poundage range.
Worth looking on Ebay etc for second hand arrows to try out before buying a brand new set.
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
Bare Shaft Tune

It makes little difference what any one says too stiff, too weak, just opinions the only way to tell what is going on is to do a bare shaft tune. Do a basic set up on the bow first (centre shot, nocking point height, brace height and tiller set to makers specs ,plus button spring tension to mid point )then see what is happening to the bare shaft. Going on what you said I would expect that the set up you have at the moment is a bit 'tail low' I would have expected the shaft to be higher than the button by the time the arrow has gone that far. But that's just my opinion .
 
Last edited:

mbaker74

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
Has she done a good initial set up of her bow? i.e. centre shot, limb alignment, nock height, sight pin above the centre of the button then adjust button pressure to get the fletched group in the centre of the target?
At this point she can try bare shaft testing but if the arrow is contacting the bow it will skew the effect of the bare shaft tests.
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
Centre of the button???? should that be arrow? and why start to tweak some thing before you know exactly where it has to go? Better to shoot a bare shaft and and be certain.
 

Rik

Supporter
Supporter
Centre of the button???? should that be arrow? and why start to tweak some thing before you know exactly where it has to go? Better to shoot a bare shaft and and be certain.
Bare shaft doesn't tell you anything about the sight, you have to set that first, in line. Then move the fletched shafts to where the sight is pointing, using button tension/position. Then start testing.

If a clearance issue is obvious at that point, fix it before going any further. You can't get good results out of testing (whether bare shaft or walkback) if things are not aligned and clear. The results you get will be skewed.
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
I have to disagree I have always found that it is not that important where the sight is pointed as long as the initial set was done and the sight was set above the shaft. As the Easton guide says it is important that the first thing you should do is to correct the nocking point height. not the adjust the button tension. You can't trust any results you get from any adjustment until you have the nocking point height right.
 

Rik

Supporter
Supporter
I have to disagree I have always found that it is not that important where the sight is pointed as long as the initial set was done and the sight was set above the shaft. As the Easton guide says it is important that the first thing you should do is to correct the nocking point height. not the adjust the button tension. You can't trust any results you get from any adjustment until you have the nocking point height right.
Well... just to be pedantic... What is "correct nocking point height"? It's a bit of a variable thing depending on how you do it, and what theory you're working to. You might change it later. So I have to say that "correct" in this context is "not too far out and with no clearance issues", which doesn't require a bare shaft test technically, though I probably would not want it wildly out on a test at 30m.
I would also quibble with "sight set above the shaft" - with normal centreshot, that puts it out of line, immediately skewing results (slightly) to an incorrect flight line. If you have to do that later to deal with a quirk of setup, fine. But I would not begin with the alignment skewed.

What I suspect the instructions really mean is: if you change the NP, (or tiller for that matter), go back an redo the rest, as it's the starting point for the process. Common sense.
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
The correct nocking point height according to the Easton guide is when the bare shaft hits at the same elevation or slightly lower as the fletched shaft. Not that precise, If it was a recurve I would be happy with an inch lower at 20yds.that would be enough to go on to the next stage. For a finger loose compound half that.
As for an incorrect flight line, the important thing is the difference in the point of impact of the bare and fletched shafts. If there is an error in the sight then it will impart the same deviation to the fletched and unfletched shafts and will have no effect on the different impact points of the bare and fletched shafts.
 
Last edited:

Mark31121

Member
Ironman
A very soft button and running with a low brace height could have the same effect - or the centre shot set wrong or plucking the string or limb alignment...
 

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
I set my sight so it is just off centre, so when I see the string line down the centre of the limbs, the sight is clearly visible,touching the string line but not obscured by it. I set the arrow off to one side to match the sight, so one is on the same line as the other,or very close.
If the arrows hit the middle, the bow plane is also on line with the gold. If they don't, either the button is set wrongly or the arrows don't match. If the bareshafts land with the fletched arrows, they match so change the button set up. If the bareshafts and fletched don't land together, change the poundage to match if possible. Change arrows if necessary.
If the sight ends up well off line with the string when on the bow's centre line, then the bow plane is well off to one side when aimed at the target.
 

Rik

Supporter
Supporter
The correct nocking point height according to the Easton guide is when the bare shaft hits at the same elevation or slightly lower as the fletched shaft. Not that precise, If it was a recurve I would be happy with an inch lower at 20yds.that would be enough to go on to the next stage. For a finger loose compound half that.
As for an incorrect flight line, the important thing is the difference in the point of impact of the bare and fletched shafts. If there is an error in the sight then it will impart the same deviation to the fletched and unfletched shafts and will have no effect on the different impact points of the bare and fletched shafts.
That's the thing: the height difference of the bare and fletched shafts will vary with distance, so by that criterion they're basically saying that the correct NP is different for different distances... unless you just pick one distance (30m?) and say that's "correct". But then it's pretty arbitrary.

Flight line: I'll have to disagree with the "no effect", unless someone can prove it. I think that if you set things up out of line, then you're just setting up an out of line setup! It's not like it will self-correct. The stiff button methods "work" like that. You may get a bare shaft or walk back that you like, but that doesn't mean that the arrows are flying in the bow plane. Sure you can adjust to that baseline, but the baseline is not in the correct plane to begin with.
But this is nitpicking. "over the shaft" is not going to be far out, unless centreshot is way off.

<edit> but, whatever... clearance is an observed issue here. That needs to be fixed before testing, and part of that fix may involve altering the NP. If it's not possible to get clearance with a "correct" bare shaft result, then the "correct" setting isn't an option.
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
You can prove it your self Rik. All the sight does is to move the bow and bow arm, and with it the plane of the bow assuming the anchor is stable. The adjustments you make to the button spring etc bring the nodes of the arrow into line with the plane of the bow. If you take your tuned bow with correctly aligned sight and shoot a bare shaft and a fletched shaft at 15 to 20 yards , the two will land close together. If now deliberately misalign the sight and repeat the test you will find that you will get the same results as before , the two shafts landing close together, but the point of impact will be displaced because the sight has moved the bow plane. Try it and see.
 

Steve Ruis

Supporter
Supporter
If your button is set too weak, the arrows may be pushing the button into the barrel and then scraping on the edge of the barrel. Simon Needham recommends putting a small wad of bluetak just next to the far side of the barrel, as think as the barrel protrudes, plus a bit. Shoot an arrow. If the button is being pushed into the barrel, there will be a mark left in the bluetak.

Also be aware that Easton changed their recurve spine chart in 2017 and now it differs from all previous charts! make sure you use the latest chart.
 

Steve Ruis

Supporter
Supporter
WHAT !!! ???
I tried to get Easton to explain, but they didn't answer my email.

Here's what I wrote when I noticed the changes:

Significant changes were made to the draw weights in the recurve bow column of the Easton Target Arrow Selection Chart (Spine Chart). Other than a few typos in the LAS catalog, the 2015 and 2016 charts are otherwise identical.

Here are the relevant numbers:

27" 2015 2016  2015  2016 
T1 17-23 21-27 +4 7 lb 7 lb
T2 24-29 27-32 +3 6 6
T3 30-35 32-36 +1 6 5
T4 36-40 36-40 0 5 5
T5 41-45 40-44 -1 5 5
T6 46-50 44-48 -2 5 5
T7 51-55 48-52 -3 5 5
T8 56-60 53-57 -3 5 5
T9 61-65 58-62 -3 5 5
T10 66-70 63-67 -3 5 5
T11 71-76 68-73 -3 6 6
Legend  is the change in associated draw weight between 2015 and 2016. 2015  and 2016  are the ranges of values listed in the boxes (note that the 2016  involves the double counting of quite a few DWs (36# could be T3 or T4 in 2016, but was only T4 in 2015). The 27˝ draw length column was included to indicate which spine groups are being refered to.
 

Stretch

Well-known member
I don't know if it is this year or previously but the weight ranges have all moved 1lb. So it used to be 41-45 now it is 40-44, I'd say that is in line with typical performance improvements in modern limbs. Bit surprised that it wasn't more obvious. Folks could be using very old print charts and not realising the change. It only really affects people on the borderline. I haven't checked all the boxes but it looks like the arrow in each box is the same, just the poundage on the right of the chart that changed by -1lb

Stretch
 
Top