Article by Rick McKinney on Arrows

[StevenB]

This can be found on the carbon tech website


[quote][color=blue]As many more companies are attempting to build arrow shafts it gets more and more confusing as to what makes a good arrow. Since most companies do not actually build their own arrows and others who may build arrows are not archers of any length of time, it becomes more and more critical to explain the mechanics of an arrow and why it is important to choose arrows that are truly the quality you should expect.

There are three specific areas that determine a good arrow which are spine, straightness and weight. These three items are discussed by many but it appears that they are a little misunderstood. Let

[Clare Barnes]

I don't think I will look at arrow selection the same way again :o

So the above is your new approach? :-?

[archerybob]

its too long ill keep my old approach :wank:

[Zoe]

Good to see you restrain from correcting Rick's grammar Clare. Eg:
There are three specific areas that determine a good arrow which are spine, straightness and weight. These three items are discussed by many but it appears that they are a little misunderstood.
Here "misunderstood" for "overestimated".

[James Park]

I think we need to be a little careful here.
Spine: Certainly important for recurve, but not especially important for compound.
Mass: The required accuracy of your arrow mass matching depends upon the distance you are shooting, as well as your score level. For example, with Clint shooting 90M, his score of 347 corresponds to a Standard Deviation of the group of about 45mm. Hence, if the group enlargement due to mismatched arrow mass contributes a significant portion of 45mm he will be losing points due to his equipment. One rule does not apply to all archers.
Straightness: This depends significantly on the nature of the bend. For example, we tested leigh Cornish's X10 target arrows in the Hooter Shooter and found that one fell outside the group by about 1.5cm at 18M due to a small bend at one end. Is that significant? I think it is for an archer of Leigh's quality, and he did not shoot it during the Nationals.

[Milkovitsch]

However, those 50 top archers of the world will argue on this point, and rightly so. They are the 8 hours per day training athletes and demand accuracy of the highest nature

****, really?

What's a Hooter Shooter? :boobies: :lol:






.

[Pete]

Sounds like he thinks all carbon arrows are the way to go then...

Hey, didn't he run the company that made all carbon arrows? What are the odds. :roll:

[Archangel]

Most all carbon arrows start to loose their spine over several hundred shots due to wear. As the arrow penetrates the target, the friction microscopically wears down the outer layer of carbon and since most companies have their spine determining layer on the outside, the spine gets weaker and weaker over time.
Several hundred shots? So potentially in a day or two you could wreck a set of carbons? I guess we're all buggered then...
On the bright side, I suspect A/C/E's and X10's (and probably some others too) last rather longer since they have a polished finish which would have to wear down first (as it wears it'd make a slight difference to weight but presumably not much to spine). Still, I can't credit that you only get a few hundred shots from a set - the arrow companies would love it though!

This "spine determining layer" sounds suspect too. I wasn't aware that there was some magical stiffer layer of carbon on the outside - the outside contributes more to stiffness than the inside, sure, but calling it a 'spine determining layer' is a bit, um, wrong (in my not-very-humble opinion).

[hoyt for life 2]

Most all carbon arrows start to loose their spine over several hundred shots due to wear. As the arrow penetrates the target, the friction microscopically wears down the outer layer of carbon and since most companies have their spine determining layer on the outside, the spine gets weaker and weaker over time.
Several hundred shots? So potentially in a day or two you could wreck a set of carbons? I guess we're all buggered then...
On the bright side, I suspect A/C/E's and X10's (and probably some others too) last rather longer since they have a polished finish which would have to wear down first (as it wears it'd make a slight difference to weight but presumably not much to spine). Still, I can't credit that you only get a few hundred shots from a set - the arrow companies would love it though!

This "spine determining layer" sounds suspect too. I wasn't aware that there was some magical stiffer layer of carbon on the outside - the outside contributes more to stiffness than the inside, sure, but calling it a 'spine determining layer' is a bit, um, wrong (in my not-very-humble opinion).
Arrow companies would hate it, other than staff shooters who get them for free no one else would buy arrows that last 100 shots, hell i wouldnt even get them tuned in that time.

[Quackor]

Most all carbon arrows start to loose their spine over several hundred shots due to wear. As the arrow penetrates the target, the friction microscopically wears down the outer layer of carbon and since most companies have their spine determining layer on the outside, the spine gets weaker and weaker over time.
Several hundred shots? So potentially in a day or two you could wreck a set of carbons? I guess we're all buggered then...
On the bright side, I suspect A/C/E's and X10's (and probably some others too) last rather longer since they have a polished finish which would have to wear down first (as it wears it'd make a slight difference to weight but presumably not much to spine). Still, I can't credit that you only get a few hundred shots from a set - the arrow companies would love it though!

This "spine determining layer" sounds suspect too. I wasn't aware that there was some magical stiffer layer of carbon on the outside - the outside contributes more to stiffness than the inside, sure, but calling it a 'spine determining layer' is a bit, um, wrong (in my not-very-humble opinion).

I don't see where is all the doubt coming from... "most several hundred" could easily mean 600 or more... depending on the quality of the spine I guess. So then if you have a dozen arrows and want to wear them down in "a day or two" (let's say two) you'll have to shoot 7200 arrows. Meaning you shot for 48 hrs straight releasing 2.5 average arrows per minute. That's nuts.
More realistically lets say we shoot for 4hrs a day (which is a LOT) releasing 2 arrows per minute on average giving us 480 arrows per practice or 40 ends. This means a set of arrow (assuming 600 shots would wear the "spine" down) will wear down after 180 days of such shooting. Thats not bad at all.

Then you say "This "spine determining layer" sounds suspect too." I don't want to be flaming or anything... but the guy at least speak from decades of experience and mentiones the details of all the tests he conduced. I think we should give credit where credit's due.

Personally I agree with one thing that sounds thru that aricle:
Archers pay too much attention to microscopic problems with their equipment and too little attention to their much bigger technique problems.

[Archangel]

I don't see where is all the doubt coming from... "most several hundred" could easily mean 600 or more... depending on the quality of the spine I guess. So then if you have a dozen arrows and want to wear them down in "a day or two" (let's say two) you'll have to shoot 7200 arrows. Meaning you shot for 48 hrs straight releasing 2.5 average arrows per minute. That's nuts.
More realistically lets say we shoot for 4hrs a day (which is a LOT) releasing 2 arrows per minute on average giving us 480 arrows per practice or 40 ends. This means a set of arrow (assuming 600 shots would wear the "spine" down) will wear down after 180 days of such shooting. Thats not bad at all.
Okay, my maths was off, I was mixing up ends with arrows. Still, I'd say 'several hundred' is closer to 300 than 600; you can do 300 within two weeks if you're in serious training. You *could* double that if you carefully swapped which arrows you shoot, but to be honest I don't think anyone does this - this could mean a new set of arrows every month.

Then you say "This "spine determining layer" sounds suspect too." I don't want to be flaming or anything... but the guy at least speak from decades of experience and mentiones the details of all the tests he conduced. I think we should give credit where credit's due.
He is speaking from decades of experience, but I'm still not going to believe a statement like that. When someone shows me a 'spine determining layer' in an arrow I'll believe it; until then I'm going to continue to think that the layers of carbon in an arrow are all basically the same stuff, possibly layered in different directions.

You're right that he's got lots of experience, sure, but this is coming off a (not particularly successful) arrow company's website which he is an owner of, so I tend to think that it may have some inherent bias in it. Sorry, but I'm just cynical like that.

[Jay.G]

yea i didn't belive the 'determining layer' either it all look like same after all i mean if it was a different layer wouldn't it be a different grade of Carbon or is it naked to the human eye? but if its a different material you need it to bond to the inner carbon layer so wouldn't you see a slight different contrast? :roll:

[Hoytusa84]

I guess his "spine determining layer" is flaming on aluminum/carbon arrows. His "layers" might be refering to the aluminum layer and the carbon layer. So companies making aluminum/carbon arrows which uses the carbon layer to determine the spine are being flamed, and we know which company he might be talking about. That is my guess only.

[Archangel]

I'm not sure it's 'flaming', but I think you're right, the previous paragraph seems to agree (I should have read that more carefully...).

[hoyt for life 2]

I guess his "spine determining layer" is flaming on aluminum/carbon arrows. His "layers" might be refering to the aluminum layer and the carbon layer. So companies making aluminum/carbon arrows which uses the carbon layer to determine the spine are being flamed, and we know which company he might be talking about. That is my guess only.
Another nail in the coffin for them cartel triples. :D

[Thing]

By the time you've worn a set of arrows to loose spine significantly, you've probably broken/crushed half of them anyway.

[gt]

Rick was a great shooter and he is a fairly good salesman, but he clearly is no engineer.

His attempts to explain frequency characteristics and modulus point to a degree in... thespian. :)

[Eberbachl]

1gn gives me a .5" drop at 90m?

So...it's OK for the heavy arrows to fall .5" outside the 10 is it?

What bull****.

I'll have my arrows weight matched, and going exactly where I point them thanks.

Of course not all of my arrows go in the ten at 90m, but if they land outside it, I need to know it was me that missed, and not a result of my gear being poorly tuned or matched.

Sounds to me like some snake oil prepared by someone who's interests can't make a well matched arrow.

[Quackor]

I might be wrong but I think his point was that archer-buyers usually pay too much attention to stuff that matters less rather than what he believes is more relevant for accurate shooting.

[GrahameA]

Hi All

IMHO Jim gives better explanations.

More to the point. The amount of drop is related to the time of flight. The longer the flight time the more it drops. Changing (variation) in the total arrow mass will vary the arrow velocity (Kinetic Energy remaining almost constant for small variations in mass). Thus heavier arrows take longer and the reverse for lighter arrows.

My recommendation is a suggestion for Jim's next book - a scientific approach to arrow flight. :-)

[GrahameA]

Hi All

IMHO Jim gives better explanations.

More to the point. The amount of drop is related to the time of flight. The longer the flight time the more it drops. Changing (variation) in the total arrow mass will vary the arrow velocity (Kinetic Energy remaining almost constant for small variations in mass). Thus heavier arrows take longer and the reverse for lighter arrows.

My recommendation is a suggestion for Jim's next book - a scientific approach to arrow flight. :-)