1 or 2 short rods

[Andyakashrek]

Thanks for the links to Steve's webpages. It helps making decisions over which set up works better, or is likely to work better, a little easier to understand now.
But why no long rods on the icons?

[LineCutter]

Originally Posted by PaulT

I have a slight variation on the v-bar & twins in that I have slightly more weight on the left to balance the bow.

Me too. With the letters L & R on the cap weights, 'cos it really messes up the balance if you get it wrong.

[SLOWHAND]

I use the same size twins on both sides but the left hand one has a weight on the end to counter the weight of the sight.

[morphymick]

Originally Posted by SLOWHAND

I use the same size twins on both sides but the left hand one has a weight on the end to counter the weight of the sight.

Snap.

Mick

[cliveanne]

As stabilisation is down to the archer, I say go your own way. I have used Long-rod, top twins, "V-bar with counter-weights (Even fitted "Upside down") to see the results. My conclusion was / is: the bow is lighter / heavier & it feels right or it don't.
I have been asked "Where's the TV?" & "Are you an early warning system?" Try everything, & don't do what others do, just because they do it.

[joetapley]

As stabilisation is down to the archer, I say go your own way.

Don't entirely agree. While there are more ways then one to 'skin a cat' as regards bow stabilisation, the long rod, flat v bar/extender system is such an elegant solution that's its use is (at top level) virtually universal.

Whatever an archer 'thinks' is a better solution probably isn't.

[tel]

Originally Posted by joetapley

Don't entirely agree. While there are more ways then one to 'skin a cat' as regards bow stabilisation, the long rod, flat v bar/extender system is such an elegant solution that's its use is (at top level) virtually universal.

Whatever an archer 'thinks' is a better solution probably isn't.

I notice you mention 'flat v bar' - are you against the angled ones for a specific reason?

tel

[joetapley]

I notice you mention 'flat v bar' - are you against the angled ones for a specific reason?

Always someone with the not so easy question .

Stabilisers are used for three things a) Archer biomechanics wrt aiming & shooting b) dynamic stabilisation and c) energy dissipation.

V bar and twins relate to a) and c) not much if anything to do with b).

The only point in angling a V bar down would be to lower the bow centre of gravity. OK some benefit with respect to b) but not important anyway and unless twins are measured in feet rather than inches very little practical change. No effect on a) but not so good for c) because longer rods not so good at dissipating high frequency energy.

As an example longest Beiter twin is 14" - to short for anything but horizontal. Only flat and 17 deg Beiter V bars made - again recognition that essentially only flat V bar has meaning. Only reason for using angled V bar is if twin rod length to long for extender so angle required to get equivalent of horizontal.

[tel]

Thanks Joe
I only asked because mine are angled down but that is only because they 'seemed' in the way flat - it doesn't appear (to someone at my level) to make any difference to the feel of the bow.

[joetapley]

Tel

If you draw a horizontal line through the throat of the grip at 90 deg to the plane of the bow then the twin weights should lie in the vertical plane near this line. If the twins are "getting in the way" than they are probably too far behind the riser. (biomechanically bad as the consequence is at a minimum an increase in the loading of the bow hand/shoulder)

See attached piccy of Park KM for V bar/twin layout