Help selecting weight of heads to tune stiff shafts

[slvrslngr]

I think you're confusing the results some. As you go up in point weight the dynamic spine of the arrow weakens, so with 145's you should possibly be seeing slightly stiff and with the 200's weak. Did you try the 225 and 260? Make sure to shoot each arrow multiple times to get consistency. Also, have you read this? Good info there.

http://www.acsbows.com/bowtuning.html

If you're planning on hunting, most people (at least the ones I know) like their arrows slightly weak as they seem to fly perfect with broadheads. YMMV.

[Dennis La Varenne]

Dennis, I hear what you are saying. I would like to just say one thing though in response to your statement regarding our ancestors etc not getting hung up on tuning etc and doing well.
I have long ago come to realize not to underestimate the knowledge, skill and ingenuity of our forefathers even the so called primitive ones. Im sure there was some form of tuning and it makes me think too that ones like HH had well tuned equipment and were able to get their equipment in to that sweet spot. How else could you consistently hit your mark and consistently group so tightly otherwise?

Shawnee,

They probably did it the same way I do now - just stuck feathers and heads on their woods and shot them. And that is pretty much all there is to it.

My spine meter is the amount of resistance I can feel to bending between my two hands - stiff is good, whippy is bad. I have done all the tech stuff and now don't bother. If the arrows feel pretty stiff, they fly quite well. I don't bother spining arrows any more. There have not been any identifiable spine jigs found yet at any archaeological sites.

Hugh Rich made Howard Hill's arrows for him. I don't recall in any of Howard's stories about either of them spining his arrows though, but Howard did have a talent for being able to feel the stiffness in an arrow between his hands which any onlooker gave him at his demo shoots and be able to draw his bow to the correct drawlength which the stiffness of the arrow required and he could shoot them quite accurately as part of his trick shooting.

I knew an old bloke in Adelaide, now long deceased, who used to go to Howard's demos in the US and that is what he would do. Alan (Nobby) Clarke used to say that his feats were simply breathtaking to watch, but he wouldn't give you 5 bob (50 cents today) for his equipment which was very mediocrely finished, especially his arrows whose vanes were obviously trimmed by rats with blunt teeth.

I still think we get a bit too carried away. I love the science involved with archery, but that is only a means to understanding what is happening, and should not be an end in itself. Simple knowledge has tended to gain semi-religious overtones lately.

[GrahameA]

Morning All.

An opinion.

I would like to just say one thing though in response to your statement regarding our ancestors etc not getting hung up on tuning etc and doing well.
I have long ago come to realize not to underestimate the knowledge, skill and ingenuity of our forefathers even the so called primitive ones. Im sure there was some form of tuning and it makes me think too that ones like HH had well tuned equipment and were able to get their equipment in to that sweet spot. How else could you consistently hit your mark and consistently group so tightly otherwise?

Way back if you were a Hunter you could get away with a couple of arrows and the hunters of those days would most likely have invested a fair bit of time in getting a couple of arrows to fly right - the alternative of missing breakfast,lunch and dinner for a few days was not that well thought of

Way back when I first started getting interested in this stuff and reading about it the general comments was make some arrows, shoot said arrows and the ones that group together keep together and use together.

Howard Hill was not that long ago and there are lots of books on Archery from that and earlier eras and they all contain information on getting your gear sorted.

IMHO The biggest issue with shooting groups is the Archer. Archers who are inconsistent in their form get large groups. On the other hand being able to shoot a small group is no guarantee that you hit what you are aiming at. One is a function of consistency in equipment and form the other is a function of being able to take into account all the variables and get the arrow on the target.

[Kanin-maskwa]

I think you're confusing the results some. As you go up in point weight the dynamic spine of the arrow weakens, so with 145's you should possibly be seeing slightly stiff and with the 200's weak. Did you try the 225 and 260? Make sure to shoot each arrow multiple times to get consistency. Also, have you read this? Good info there.

http://www.acsbows.com/bowtuning.html

If you're planning on hunting, most people (at least the ones I know) like their arrows slightly weak as they seem to fly perfect with broadheads. YMMV.

Yes sorry that's what I meant. 145gr hit a bit left of fletched group, 200 hit right of the group. I'm shooting right handed.
I hear some say don't pay atention to the way the shaft flies only where they hit in relation to the fletched arrows. Others say yes do pay attention to the way they fly.
145 hit slight left of group and land with knock right. 200 hit right of group and knock in line (I'd say because of the greater FOC they straighten out on the flight path?)

Was supposed to receive my new arrows by the end of this week but no sighn of them so hopefully by next week and I can try out the 1916.
While I wait I'll keep fooling around with these and just keep focussing on my release.

[slvrslngr]

Yeah, I figured as much, it's easy to get confused, I think I'm the poster boy for tuning confusion, LOL! How did the fletched arrow shoot with the 200 grn. point?

[Kanin-maskwa]

They seemed okay but I was surprised that they dropped off at only 15m. They would group about 6-8" below the group of 125gr and the 145gr would group virtually right in the pack maybe 1-2" below on average.
I think 2016 shafts would tune in better then 1916 but I'm not sure.
If 2016 and 145 heads matched up I would be happy with the weight combo, GPP and FOC but would have to try to know for sure.
I'm still interested to see these 1916 fly with 125gr heads but think they might be a bit light GPP for me.
Oh well I'm looking to perhaps buy a RF DF long bow in carbon or comparable.
And I would probably shoot carbons out of it. Thinking 48-50# Only prob is the one bow I'm looking at has about a 14 month wait. Blahhh!
Got my eye on another bow though I might be able to get faster.... Not carbon though but efficiency is near on par and all have a rep for being very accurate smooth quiet dead in hand works of art. Mmmmmmmmmm
Anyway I'll get this bow sorted first so I can get out hunting and worry about the next when I get there.