Tiller Curiosity

Timid Toad

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
A couple of coaches keep telling me that modern bows should be set to zero tiller. I have assumed they are simply mistaken. From what I see, even top line bows, shot with med. release, will have some positive tiller, unless maybe for a really low grip. Am I generally correct? I don't want to pass on incorrect information :) and from what you say, a bit of positive tiller would be the norm.
I *think* that should be read to mean set the riser's limb bolts to equal, ie the same number of turns in or out. So zero on the riser, would produce the limb's natural tiller.
That would be my starting point with a new set up anyway. and usually it's minor tweaks from there.
 

Stretch

Well-known member
I *think* that should be read to mean set the riser's limb bolts to equal, ie the same number of turns in or out. So zero on the riser, would produce the limb's natural tiller.
That would be my starting point with a new set up anyway. and usually it's minor tweaks from there.
Richard Priestman helped me set up my Avalon in 96/97 Winter season. I let him do the basic setup and I then worked with it from there. He set the bow with zero measured tiller. Shot great, never went back. The limbs were not zero tillered for their natural tiller. Natural tiller does seem to make sense but for all the bows I have it doesn’t work so well for me.

Koreans (almost always) recommend some tiller but less on longer draw archers (1-3mm AFAIR but please use your Google expertise to verify). And of course they could be fibbing.

As ever with archery, I prefer to do what I find works rather than trying to theorise. Personally with more +ve tiller I have always experienced more tension in my bowhand and draw fingers... zero or close to zero has always felt easier.

YMMV

Stretch
 

Sid2nd

New member
I *think* that should be read to mean set the riser's limb bolts to equal, ie the same number of turns in or out. So zero on the riser, would produce the limb's natural tiller.
That would be my starting point with a new set up anyway. and usually it's minor tweaks from there.
There are risers out there where you cant assume fully in results in equal limb exit angles as a datum.
 

Timid Toad

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
Richard Priestman helped me set up my Avalon in 96/97 Winter season. I let him do the basic setup and I then worked with it from there. He set the bow with zero measured tiller. Shot great, never went back. The limbs were not zero tillered for their natural tiller. Natural tiller does seem to make sense but for all the bows I have it doesn’t work so well for me.

Koreans (almost always) recommend some tiller but less on longer draw archers (1-3mm AFAIR but please use your Google expertise to verify). And of course they could be fibbing.

As ever with archery, I prefer to do what I find works rather than trying to theorise. Personally with more +ve tiller I have always experienced more tension in my bowhand and draw fingers... zero or close to zero has always felt easier.

YMMV

Stretch
Hate to tell you this but you'll have trouble persuading anyone these days that a bow from 95/96 is a "modern" bow ;)
 

Timid Toad

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
There are risers out there where you cant assume fully in results in equal limb exit angles as a datum.
Common, or rarities? Most (read all) of the ones I come across at the club, ie mass produced from the big manufacturers, do seem to work well as a good starting point with this theory.
 

Stretch

Well-known member
Hate to tell you this but you'll have trouble persuading anyone these days that a bow from 95/96 is a "modern" bow ;)
Machined riser, adjustable weight/tiller, alignment system, interchangeable grips, 2 plunger holes, clicker extender plate, holes for wobbly bits, decent over centre. What do you think makes a modern bow modern? The only significant change is the replacement of glass with carbon and I don’t see how that comes into play.

If 1996 is too old for you please pick your preference... Hoyt Axis, Aerotec, Helix, RX, HPX, Ion-X, Prodigy RX, Xi... limbs mainly Hoyt but also W&W, Samick and Border - same for all of them - even the wonky Hoyt HP geometry.

Perhaps you could explain what huge advances in recurve risers would make it work in a 1996 bow and not in a 2021 bow? I don’t see it. Even side by side today I don’t see it. The Xi feels nicer than the Avalon but both will put an arrow in the ten ring every time if you do the same thing.

Stretch
 

Timid Toad

Moderator
Staff member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
I'm thinking more of the limbs, actually. Or is all the annual marketing of the next big advance in design tech and materials from Hoyt W+W etc all hokum?
 

Sid2nd

New member
Common, or rarities? Most (read all) of the ones I come across at the club, ie mass produced from the big manufacturers, do seem to work well as a good starting point with this theory.
At the correct time. Some were quite popular. But are rare now.
There are other risers in non target lengths that are comon, that are also "abnormal"
A bow is still a bow. Irrespective of its length, and if 99% of bows are a copy of one bow, the observations on them, make a observation, not a rule
 

Sid2nd

New member
I'm thinking more of the limbs, actually. Or is all the annual marketing of the next big advance in design tech and materials from Hoyt W+W etc all hokum?
I was under the impression that the formula and F4s were the formula to success.
I couldnt see any difference in the DFC or total limb mass or distribution of limb mass from the carbon plus. To me the forumla was the easton forumula to gettin a spine chart to work. Which meant repeating the same dynamic limb response to.match the spine chart. Yes. Formula. Bow+limb+chart+arrow = tune
You dont need to understand archery. Just follow the ingredients prescribed
 
D

Deleted member 7654

Guest
Machined riser, adjustable weight/tiller, alignment system, interchangeable grips, 2 plunger holes, clicker extender plate, holes for wobbly bits, decent over centre. What do you think makes a modern bow modern? The only significant change is the replacement of glass with carbon and I don’t see how that comes into play.

If 1996 is too old for you please pick your preference... Hoyt Axis, Aerotec, Helix, RX, HPX, Ion-X, Prodigy RX, Xi... limbs mainly Hoyt but also W&W, Samick and Border - same for all of them - even the wonky Hoyt HP geometry.

Perhaps you could explain what huge advances in recurve risers would make it work in a 1996 bow and not in a 2021 bow? I don’t see it. Even side by side today I don’t see it. The Xi feels nicer than the Avalon but both will put an arrow in the ten ring every time if you do the same thing.

Stretch
Maybe he meant 1496? ;)
Del
 

Stretch

Well-known member
I'm thinking more of the limbs, actually. Or is all the annual marketing of the next big advance in design tech and materials from Hoyt W+W etc all hokum?
It’s not exactly hokum, all you have to do is shoot the different limbs to feel the difference. But it’s not revolution, it’s evolution. Compare a Velos limb (which by the way came out in 2018) with a Carbon + limb and the latter will feel a bit clunky and a little bit slow (or in my case similar speed but with a 5# heavier draw weight on the C+.

The W&W I understand less as most of their limbs are not well suited to long draw archers. The range is more troubling with new models released annually in the same target group and older models that remain in production. They have limbs for people who like a lot of stack feel at the clicker (NS), slight less so (NS G) and allegedly soft (MXT and MXT-10) but revolution? No. Things like Graphene Dampers (if they do actually contain graphene or work) are just for feel.

As I see it *typically* there has been an increase in curvature, a reduction in weight (carbon replacing glass) and increased torsional stability (funkier carbon). There’s also been some twitching with core layup, epoxy cores. I don’t see why any of that would affect tiller any more than a wood glass limb. Major factors are the riser geometry (and even that is fairly fluid) and the archers contact points.

As I said, YMMV Anyone who stipulate zero tiller or +1/2” is just wrong. What works for one person is not always right for another. Zero is viable, if it works for you it is likely it will always work for you. Equally 6mm or 10mm may be the trick. But changing your limbs or riser within fairly significant parameters is unlikely to change that (Unless you had it wrong in the first place).

Stretch

P.S. Yes archery marketing is terrible and the oversell is sickening but that pretty much reflects badly on every brand whether it is direct like a Hoyt and W&W or subversive social media marketing of more boutique brands.
 

Stretch

Well-known member
I was under the impression that the formula and F4s were the formula to success.
I couldnt see any difference in the DFC or total limb mass or distribution of limb mass from the carbon plus. To me the forumla was the easton forumula to gettin a spine chart to work. Which meant repeating the same dynamic limb response to.match the spine chart. Yes. Formula. Bow+limb+chart+arrow = tune
You dont need to understand archery. Just follow the ingredients prescribed
Unfortunately it was impossible to shoot both sets in the same riser but the F4 in an RX didn’t feel anything like any riser (Radian through Matrix) with the C+. So something was different.

Stretch
 

jerryRTD

Well-known member
There is no right or wrong way. There is only what works for you and what does not. So many people saying that they set their bow to this or that but what they forget is that the archer is an integral part of the system
 

Whitehart

Well-known member
There is no right or wrong way. There is only what works for you and what does not. So many people saying that they set their bow to this or that but what they forget is that the archer is an integral part of the system
ILF/HDS has its working limits so there is a right and wrong way, yes the archer is an integral part but also the most unreliable. I guess because of the churn in our sport people keep trying ideas they think are new but have been tried before - too much time is wasted by archers re inventing the wheel, if you go outside of the ILF/HDS working parameters (that are tried and tested at all levels of our sport) and it "really" works for you then you are the exception or a person who has no idea what they are doing and this "what works for you" is a cop out. From what I have seen of international archers bows they are all very close in their set up with things like Tiller BH and Button centre shot and pressure given that with the exception of Mr Nespoli they all shoot similar draw weights, yet all of these bows are set up independently of each other and in different countries with different ideas when it comes to shooting style and fine tuning methods.
 

albatross

Supporter
Supporter
AIUK Saviour
I *think* that should be read to mean set the riser's limb bolts to equal, ie the same number of turns in or out. So zero on the riser, would produce the limb's natural tiller.
That would be my starting point with a new set up anyway. and usually it's minor tweaks from there.
So does that mean I am correct in shooting my limbs at +10mm tiller or should it be less?
 

KidCurry

Well-known member
AIUK Saviour
So does that mean I am correct in shooting my limbs at +10mm tiller or should it be less?
Shooting Oly recurve that's where I would start and adjust down to zero by 1mm changes at a time, no more. If barebow I would start at 5mm and adjust down to -10mm by 1mm changes.
 

Stretch

Well-known member
So does that mean I am correct in shooting my limbs at +10mm tiller or should it be less?
10mm is absolutely fine if the bow feels good and your aiming is relatively easy (you’re not feeling the bow want to drift high or low). Only you can tell. I have shot pretty well with as much as 13mm.

Stabiliser setup, grip position and finger placement are all factors as well.

If you are happy, you‘re fine.

Stretch
 
Top