How much does modern technology help?

[Bulldog]

[quote=Paul120;264534]Wasn't it rumoured that they were using the first evolution of Carbon/Ally arrows?


I belive they where the first AC arrows that Pace / McKinney used.

The man to confirm this one is Gtek.

[not dead yet]

Originally Posted by richard priestman

I am amazed that anybody remembered that I shop an Olympic Dream Bow- 1988 to 1990 which was basically an old Black Widow/PSE Riser with Border Glass/Wood fibreglass limbs sold by The Pro Shop (now Archery World).
I used ACE 500's with 80 gn points 30" 43# on my fingers and a Fast Flight string- I think my arrow speed was approx 214 feet per second. The most forgiving bow I ever shot. I scored 1314 for a Fita at the European Champs in Luxumburg (placed 4th) I didn't beat that score until several years later with 1323- shot with Hoyt Carbon Foam Limbs still with ACE's

I am not replying to brag about the score, only to show that good scores are possible with Wood Limbs.

richard full details plz.....you shot 520 aces with an inch cut off the back to make them 500's.lol., and my first bow when i started back in 1990 was exactly the same as yours but left handed, and it was a beaut.

richard and i started shooting about the same time, both our parents were good friends at 14 i found women, and richard went on to the olympics....who was right...pmsl

pete

[JohnK]

Originally Posted by Bulldog

The man to confirm this one is Gtek.

Or Rick

I quote:

We both shot Aluminum arrows in 1978 or 1979 when we shot the records. The Aluminum Carbon shaft did not come into existence for prototypes until 1983. Most of our big scores were shot with aluminum shafts. All of Darrell's world records were by aluminum and most of mine were except the 1352, 1347, 1346 and 1340. Those were shot by a prototype arrow that is not in existence today.

[akarchery]

Not quite correct Pete, I did shoot ACE 500's with 1 inch cut off the back making them almost a 470 in spine. The 500 was a prototype size that Easton never put on the market. I went on to shoot 520's with 1.5 inches off the back to get the same stiffness and they shot just as good.

In those days ACE's were marketed as a shaft that you should cut varying amounts off the back end to get exactly the spine you required. It is an expensive experiment if you cut them wrong - Not to be recommended unless you really know what you are doing.

[gtek]

That "prototype arrow" Mr. McKinney refers to in relation to his 1352 was the predecessor of the Easton X10. I supplied those to him in 1992.

Darrell used carbon limbs (first produced by Jim Easton and Earl Hoyt) in the 1976 Olympic Games and thereafter including the 1342 shot in Japan with 2114 Easton aluminum shafts.

[not dead yet]

Originally Posted by richard priestman

Not quite correct Pete, I did shoot ACE 500's with 1 inch cut off the back making them almost a 470 in spine. The 500 was a prototype size that Easton never put on the market. I went on to shoot 520's with 1.5 inches off the back to get the same stiffness and they shot just as good.

In those days ACE's were marketed as a shaft that you should cut varying amounts off the back end to get exactly the spine you required. It is an expensive experiment if you cut them wrong - Not to be recommended unless you really know what you are doing.

or get them for free...........

i wasn't far wrong...

[ASW1973]

The biggest increase in scores in recurve was down to one very small bit of kit.... THE CLICKER.
Arrow technology has allowed a greater consistencey of result in varying conditions with proportionally lighter poundage to speed.
to a degree a well functioning set of wood limbs will perform arguably as well (in the hands of an expert) as the newer generation limbs, however the consistencey of result with the new limbs with respect to lighter arrows, reduced stretch bow strings and temperature (condition) effects is greater. Similarly the wood limb will not stand up to the same volume of arrows as a composite material limb.
So the scores were, as has been shown, acheivable with previous generation equipment and the only piece of kit to revolutionise scoring so far has been the clicker

[BorderBows]

Originally Posted by ASW1973

The biggest increase in scores in recurve was down to one very small bit of kit.... THE CLICKER.
Arrow technology has allowed a greater consistencey of result in varying conditions with proportionally lighter poundage to speed.
to a degree a well functioning set of wood limbs will perform arguably as well (in the hands of an expert) as the newer generation limbs, however the consistencey of result with the new limbs with respect to lighter arrows, reduced stretch bow strings and temperature (condition) effects is greater. Similarly the wood limb will not stand up to the same volume of arrows as a composite material limb.
So the scores were, as has been shown, acheivable with previous generation equipment and the only piece of kit to revolutionise scoring so far has been the clicker

First of all, wood cored limbs can stand up to as many arrows as you dare to shoot though them if they are made properly...
next point is that is stability in a limb can improve grouping by say 5% then the deviation from centre from top archers is less so, 5% may appear less. but it still gets the odd line cutter more then the ones that are not so stable. Then there is the addition of for the not so experienced archer 5% is going to be a visable improvement as their grouping does make a bigger difference if you see what im heading at. Ask Whitehart about the number of arrows his WH wood core limbs have shot...

The reason wood cores have bad press is that the marketting machines dont want to push wood cores, so the wood core is pushed into the badly made cheaper end of the market, where quality issues are more rife.
If the mass market companies are not pushed into making better limbs by healthy levels of competition then limb evolution stagnates. This has been an issue in our mind, and new colours have been the fad rather than technical improvements in limb technology. Its only in the last 5 years has there been any concetpual technology added to limbs that has ventured further than UD bow Glass and a common old filler be it wood or foam.

[akarchery]

I started shooting before the days of clickers, in those days we used pieces of rubber bands set vertically ( I had one on my Steel Bow) as a simple draw length indicator(visual)which you just shot through. This progressed to the rubber band being attached to the back of the bow horizontally with a small flag attached(usually a piece of fletching)in such a way it rested underneath the arrow so that when you pulled the required draw length the flag 'popped up" the movement seen in your periphery vision triggered your release in your subconscious mind. In my opinion this was really the first piece of equipment fundemental in the development of scores because it took away the conscious decision of when to release, the clicker was a further development of this idea being audible rather than visual. The 'popper-upper' addressed all the same inconsistancies of shot that a clicker does.

In fact Ron Bishop, one of our greatest competitors shot a 'popper-upper' right through the 70's 80' and 90's when he was shooting for GB at World Champs etc. There are also some great archers around the world who shoot other variations which rely on visual and sensory rather than audible means.

[akarchery]

I agree with Border here, I always recommend a quality pair of Wood Carbon Limbs over Carbon Foam, I have never been able to distinguish any iimprovement in scores with Carbon Foam.

Put the cash you save by buying Wood Carbon Limbs towards a new set of well matched arrows.

As regards temperature affecting Wood Core Limbs, I have shot in Arizona in 110 degrees with Border Wood Limbs with Black Fibreglass, The performance of the limb did not alter. The tiller, nocking point, tuning, scores , sight marks etc etc all normal.