Certified Scales

[Marcus]

For years at tournaments I have seen people get away with over 60lb on the grounds that the scales 'were not certified' leaving judges and organisers deadlocked and the archers walking away without changing their gear.

What some may find interesting is that at a World event if you bow weighs in over 60lb there is nothing you can do except turn it down. Their veiw is "these are the scales, turn your bow down or do not shoot".

So is this something we will see in Australia? Seems like a sensible thing to me and cut out people trying to get around using illegal gear.

[Ed]

I like it:thumb:

[2Dogs]

I think that is up to the judges to enforce.

Up here and at the Nats I've attended, it has been a case of "Change your Poundage" or bugger off.

So it should be too.

[apexrob]

Pats bow in Croatia was 60.6# I recall, definetly over 60# anyway, they let him through. Apparently there is a 1# tolerance we were told.

[GuyDawg9]

Pats bow in Croatia was 60.6# I recall, definetly over 60# anyway, they let him through. Apparently there is a 1# tolerance we were told.

yeah i've been told that too, i've even been told that some times they allow a 2# tolerance, but i don't know about the 2# one for sure seems like to much tolerance.

[apexrob]

I think having the #1 tolerance is a good thing, I use the same scale they use at the world events, never have they been exactly the same.

[2Dogs]

The rules don't state a tolerance.

Although I think they should

[Archangel]

Well, 60# with a 1# tolerance is the same as 61# dead...
You could think of the existing one as 59# with a 1# tolerance if it makes it better ;-)

[The One]

Seems that it's a pick and choose around the world. Would be better if people kept scales calibrated and had a set rule for everywhere.

[2Dogs]

Would be.......

[GuyDawg9]

would be, should be, could be, but their not.

[dilligaf]

1lbs is certainly a tight tollerance 0.017% most comercial scales would not be that good IMHO.
But
I think that is no reason the rules say 60lbs and you should ensure that your equipment will be within that requirement regardless of what the tolerance is. If you have a dispute over the tolerance of the scales used you should be prepared and have your calibrated scales with certificate from a nationally recognised testing lab available to prove your inocent, if not here is an allen key or bugger off.

What can be done is AA could have a set of weights certified and then write a procedure on how to calibrate a set of scales and store the calibrated equipment then each state could send in there scales to have calibrated.
You would not need to recalibrate the weights unless there is a reason why the weights could change there weight over time if so then the re-calibration period would need to be added to the procedure.
This way of calibration is widely excepted in industry as there is tracability to a nationaly recognised lab the procedure states the requirements of recalibration therefor AA could issue a certificate to that effect.

[Xs24-7]

The Spring scales used by most judges are horrible, and without calibration you can pick up 3 different ones and have 3 different weights. How is it fair to say to the archer "lower your wieght your 2#s over" when you cant guartuntee that the scale is right...the archer then has to resite in all their marks, etc... I say give the archer the benefit of the doubt and let them shoot. I doubt anyone has ever won a shoot because they were 2#s over.

[Archangel]

1lbs is certainly a tight tollerance 0.017% most comercial scales would not be that good IMHO.
Suggest you revisit your maths on that one. It's a 1.7% tolerance.

[GrahameA]

Well, 60# with a 1# tolerance is the same as 61# dead...
You could think of the existing one as 59# with a 1# tolerance if it makes it better ;-)

Sounds good to me.

The way I read it the setting is, 60 + 0

Personally, given the equipment that is available on the market at reasonable prices why would you not use something a tad more accurate than your typical bow spring scale.

If the rules are that flexible or not checked why have them in the first place?

[James Park]

The common spring balance scales used are a problem. It is well known to most of the top compounders that it is dead easy to get them to read 5 pounds light. In fact it is good sport to do so when you are asked to weigh your bow. On one occassion one of the archers got a scale to read 7 pounds light, which was reasonably impressive.

[Enlightened One]

The common spring balance scales used are a problem. It is well known to most of the top compounders that it is dead easy to get them to read 5 pounds light. In fact it is good sport to do so when you are asked to weigh your bow. On one occassion one of the archers got a scale to read 7 pounds light, which was reasonably impressive.

at equipment inspection at the 2006 junior worlds i got an 8lb variance. it regestered 49lb when i know my bow was at about 57lb. those spring scales are a joke, i think and experienced archer can judge pundage better than those things

[tropicalshot]

so to me the answer is for AA to agree on which bow scale is within a certain tollerance, and instruct the regional bodies to have one of these made avail at each Fita event/Nats etc with the regional bodies responsable for having it certified yearly, the larger bodies may wish to have more than one or two but that would be their call.

[Oompa Loompa 3]

Even then they need to know how to use said scale. You can always use momentum etc to your advantage when trying to come in under weight.

[wareagle]

When I had a set of scales calibrated by the company I bought it from, They used different, true weights. so why not buy one of these blocks of steel in 60lb. and cart it around with you.:brick:

[2Dogs]

Jim Larven did that for the nationals a few years ago.

The weight had a hook attached and rested on the ground.

You then attach your bowstring, and lift the bow. If your bow lifted the weight off the ground you were over 60#.

That was the theory, I do believe Jim Park proved it was an incorrect way to do it.

[Freeman]

Forget a poundage limit, bring in a speed limit... then it would be a fair system.

The spring loaded scales are a joke, I proved that at the World Games by weighing my bow in at 52#.

[James Park]

That was the theory, I do believe Jim Park proved it was an incorrect way to do it.
Correct.
The steel weight was 60 pounds and the theory was that you hooked it on your string and if you bow lifted it off the ground your bow was too strong.
However.......
The draw weight of your bow is actually permitted to be 60 pounds, in which case you will indeed be able to lift a 60 pound weight off the ground.
For this one to work the weight would need to be more than 60 pounds, but FITA does not have a tolerance, so how much more than 60 pounds do you make the weight, etc.
That is: a flawed technique.

(Aside from that, you could slip the cables out of the cable slide and trick it).

[frommy]

..... and besides that, if this was used in Sydney, that bloody thing nearly took the finger off Margaret Nelson in about 2003 in the course of moving it! :mad:

[wareagle]

Well at least it could be used to check the scales used.

[katzgrin]

Jim Larven did that for the nationals a few years ago.

The weight had a hook attached and rested on the ground.

You then attach your bowstring, and lift the bow. If your bow lifted the weight off the ground you were over 60#.

That was the theory, I do believe Jim Park proved it was an incorrect way to do it.
Lifting 60#? Don't tell the OH&S police.:wink:

[Archangel]

Lifting 60#? Don't tell the OH&S police.:wink:
That's ~27kg... okay to take on a plane. I hope he attached a "Bend Your Knees!" tag to it though ;-)

[frommy]

Lifting 60#? Don't tell the OH&S police.:wink:

No. The idea was that the weight should not lift off the ground.

[James Park]

However, if you bow was exactly 60 pounds (and hence FITA legal) you could indeed lift a 60 pound weight off the ground.

[Richard_Stock]

what about the easton scale

http://www.eastonarchery.com/img/accessories/JPEG_DETAILS/bowforcemaperpack.jpg

This is what i use when i am judging a fita tournement. Easton says that they are very accurate. Anyone have any experience with this type???

[James Park]

I agree, the Easton scale is excellent (and accurate).

[Ed]

what about the easton scale

http://www.eastonarchery.com/img/accessories/JPEG_DETAILS/bowforcemaperpack.jpg

This is what i use when i am judging a fita tournement. Easton says that they are very accurate. Anyone have any experience with this type???


Have found this to be spot on - Jim Larven is always happy with this scale, too.

[Ozzy]

Are we stating that digital bow scales are usually accurate then ?
Interesting. Weighed my bow at Pats using his hand held bow scales on Friday. The following day (yesterday), weighed the bow on the spring scales at AAC that everyone says are spot-on, & 3lbs heavier at peak & let-off ! :o
That caused some surprised looks at AAC, let me tell you.
I call that a HUGE difference.

[Shirt]

Three sets of Easton scales, none more than two months old:
1) 49.8, 49.7, 50.0
2) 50.5, 50.8, 50.7
3) 51.2, 51.0, 48.9

That was with a recurve, but the results should still be reasonable. Scales were handed to the archer at random so there's no bias (as in, didn't do three with one, then three with the next, etc.)

Nice and consistent from one weighing to the next, but still an element of difference between sets. The blokes that owned the scales said that they did notice a bit of difference depending on how new the batteries were.

0.02

[Sean McKenty]

what about the easton scale

http://www.eastonarchery.com/img/accessories/JPEG_DETAILS/bowforcemaperpack.jpg

This is what i use when i am judging a fita tournement. Easton says that they are very accurate. Anyone have any experience with this type???


This thing is the worst piece of garbage Easton puts their name on,at our Spring Classic my bow weighed 60.6 and was told to turn it down, I took a FULL turn off (counterclockwise in front of the judge) and it now weighed 62.3lbs. I turned it back up to original setting and it read 61.2 one more pull at the same setting and it read 60.3 which they let go.... garbage total garbage. My digital scale at home reads within .4lbs every pull and it cost $20

[dbjac]

This thing is the worst piece of garbage Easton puts their name on,at our Spring Classic my bow weighed 60.6 and was told to turn it down, I took a FULL turn off (counterclockwise in front of the judge) and it now weighed 62.3lbs. I turned it back up to original setting and it read 61.2 one more pull at the same setting and it read 60.3 which they let go.... garbage total garbage. My digital scale at home reads within .4lbs every pull and it cost $20
I'm quite sure they must have had defective scales. I've never seen an Easton scale be inconsistent like that at all. So far, their precision and accuracy has been unmatched by any scale i've used.

[Eberbachl]

This thing is the worst piece of garbage Easton puts their name on,at our Spring Classic my bow weighed 60.6 and was told to turn it down, I took a FULL turn off (counterclockwise in front of the judge) and it now weighed 62.3lbs. I turned it back up to original setting and it read 61.2 one more pull at the same setting and it read 60.3 which they let go.... garbage total garbage. My digital scale at home reads within .4lbs every pull and it cost $20

Indeed - as dbjac suggested maybe they were defective? Perhaps even it was something as simple as a low battery?

The Easton scales I've used have been great.

[GrahameA]

Morning All

My $0:02

I have a set of no name brand digital scales.

1. There accuracy goes right off when the battery start to lose a bit.

2. There accuracy is dependent of the straightness of the pull. The best thing to do is hang them up and then use them like a conventional scale

3. They are more accurate than the usual spring type bows scales - ever tried to read them, some have very crude divisions.

4. You need to calibrate your scales against a know mass. Or even better several known masses.

5. When used by a competent operator they have a high repeatability (pprox +/- 0.01 kg which is more of a function of them only having a 2 decimal place readout.

[whiz]

1. There accuracy goes right off when the battery start to lose a bit.


That's something worth knowing!

[whiz]

The general issue that you're always going to have is that there is more than one measuring device used.

If there was an AA official 60 lb weight that could be sent around to calibrate everyone's scales while being viewed by a judge, you could at least say that there was some kind of attempt to level the issue in Australia.

For a lot of money, you're likely to be able to find a calibration lab somewhere who will check out your gear for you.

If I was organising the weighing of bows at a tournament, I would try to make available three scales. Archers would have the choice of which would weigh their bow with. Luck of the draw if you run at exactly 60 pound...

[apexrob]

This thing is the worst piece of garbage Easton puts their name on,at our Spring Classic my bow weighed 60.6 and was told to turn it down, I took a FULL turn off (counterclockwise in front of the judge) and it now weighed 62.3lbs. I turned it back up to original setting and it read 61.2 one more pull at the same setting and it read 60.3 which they let go.... garbage total garbage. My digital scale at home reads within .4lbs every pull and it cost $20

Mine does the same thing.

From the world target champs 07 to the 3 worldcups i've attended this year, I have seen a 3.5 lb variation from scale to scale. WTF is up with that.