I don’t see how
Easton could be best at 20m in the first part of the test but Fivics better in the second part...
Given the role the nock plays in the overall system its hard to see how an nock can be better at longer distance than it is at shorter distance...
Apologies if I am thinking too Olympic style when interpreting the results.
Hi Stretch
I have a bow (W&W AXT + X Tour limbs) and ACEs for 90m-50m, another bow (
Mybo Elite + WinEX limbs) and ACCs for 30m and 18m. Both have
Beiter buttons for optimal setting. I usually set my 90m bow optimally at 70m although it is currently set for 50m. I bare shaft tuned for both
Beiter and Fivics. I think the issue is, even with two bows set up and tuned optimally for each type of nock, when shooting three under, the bow is never going to shoot really well. The Beiter nock, which, I agree, needs a slightly higher nock point anyway, doesn't respond well to crawls over 15mm. The Fivics does seem to perform slightly better at these crawls, but noticeably better at crawls of 30mm and over.
There is significant downward force on the arrow nock at these crawls. I use solid colours as I found too many failures with transparent colours when shooting
compound. I found the solids to be more pliable. I don't know if this has an effect during string walking but the Beiter is significantly longer than the Fivics. Does it flex more, I can't say.
Top - Beiter
Middle - Fivics
Bottom - MAC (a great value nock, but falls off the string when I reverse for some reason)
I doubt any of this remotely applies to Olympic
recurve