Launcher clearance

[Eberbachl]

It would be reasonable to assume (I'm assuming :) ) that the best case situation when releasing an arrow is that there is no arrow or vane contact on the rest when a powder test is conducted.

I would also assume that vane contact should be avoided at all costs, but my question is in peoples experiences, is a slight, but consistent, arrow contact close to the rear of the shaft acceptable with a launcher style rest if the vanes are making no contact?

....what are your thoughts?

[James Park]

My experience is that vane contact is devastating: can take off huge numbers of points.
I would also much prefer that there was no shaft conact either.

[Marcus]

Consider this Luke
There will be inconsistancies in fletching when you make then and as they age. One here and there will develop or be on a different angle to other flteched. Also nocks may move or not always be in exactly the same position (talking less than a mm here). That means that contact will occur differently on different arrows.

[clever_guy]

Eberbachl;

Depends on the distance and the arrow. For 20yd (Vegas) with "logs" (25xx-26xx), a little vane contact won't kill you, as long as it is consistant, and you are consistant in your form. With smaller carbons and long distances you will see a greater variance as a result of vane contact.

Unless you are using a fallaway you are always going to get some shaft contact. With skinny carbons it is hard to find small enough launcher blades to avoid contact with vanes, and still keep the arrow on the rest.

If you play with it and still get a little contact at the end of the day, don't stress to much over it. Unlessyou are in the 1400 (FITA) range there are probably other things to spend your time focusing on besides completely eliminating all contact between rest and arrow.

Hope it helps,

-CG

[rsw]

Any vane contact with the rest is disaster. I have found that almost always my launcher will leave tracks past the vanes and almost the full length of the shaft; however, it doesn't impact on tight groups at all if the vanes are clear. I use a Pro-Tuner with the small launcher and I grind the launcher down to a very narrow tip as well. I can get clearance on my Hyperspeeds and ACEs that way, but the stock launcher is hard to use with full vane clearance on these tiny carbon shafts. My Trophy Taker rest works very well indoors and I am considering trying it for field shooting with the ACEs as well.

[Eberbachl]

I'm currently getting excellent clearance from both my shaft and vanes using a golden key premier rest with the wire launcher. I have however had situations where although I had clearance from the vanes, the shaft did make contact with the launcher, and I have acheived very good grouping this way. This leads me to beleive that some contact with the shaft is not all bad as long as it doesn't hit the vanes.

Assuming we are talking about launcher style rests here, and not fall aways....my understanding is that correct arrow flexing (spine) is one of the key considerations in getting good clearance. One of the concepts I seem to be misunderstanding here is that the Magnock system is saying that reducing arrow flex is a good thing....would that not have an adverse effect on launcher clearance in some cases?

:)

[OldDog]

AAAGH questions questions, you are driving me crazy :x

[Magnockman]

An idealy tuned

[Eberbachl]

Thanks Magnockman for a very interesting and informative post.

So, what you're saying is that whilst with or without a Magnock, there will be flexing of the arrow due to spine considerations, it is only the lack of pinch when the arrow actually leaves the string that any difference in flexing occurs? And it is then that the Magnock equipped arrow has less flex.

It was my understanding of the less flex issue until this post that you were claiming that a Magnock equipped arrow will have all of it's flex virtually eliminated.

Thanks for clearing that up........boy, would I ove to have a slow motion camera! The fun we could have with that would be awesome :D

[Marcus]

Magnockman
Did your testing take into account the spine changes that would occur with the additional weight added to the back end of the arrow? What kind of resonance testing did you do to back up the video findings?

Agree Luke, interesting stuff.

[Magnockman]

Luke-- That's basically it in a nut-shell. The application of a centered D-loop does most of the work to reduce arrow flexing-- the magnet finishes the job by eliminating the variance and snap found in conventional nocks. You may not notice much of an difference at 20 yards with a 600 grain 2613 shaft but with a ACE or lighter arrow you will, especially at 100 yards?

There is no additional weight added to the arrow

[Marcus]

Thanks for that info. Great to get detailed test information from a manufacturer.
Speed doesn't personally worry me, my bow is shooting 250fps with my Doo Sungs, hardly setup for speed. I even increased the brace height from standard.

Is it possible that the bending of the nock you are referring to comes from excessive pull from the bottom cam on some single cam bows? Are they all bending the same way?

[Magnockman]

Yeah they bend the same way-- on right hand bows they bend to the right (looking from the rear of the arrow) and opposite on left hand bows.
The groupings were terrible but after we changed to the solid nocks the problem disappeared. I was going to ask PSE to let me use their testing room again but the mold change was less expensive than the slow motion video room rental.
I have a very well know archery Engineer twisting his brain on this one-- his first impression was it's impossible and someone was trying to play games with me, but I've seen it happen.
The effect or the twist on single cams are the only thing I could come up with too but I guess since the solid nocks cured the problem I won

[Eberbachl]

mmm, just a thought Magnockman, but if I understand this correctly, would strengthening the Magnock by going to a solid nock not just stop the nock from bending, and put increased pressure at the end of your arrow shaft instead?

If that is the case, will the increased pressure on the inside of the shaft cause the shaft to split prematurely instead of the magnock bending?

....just a thought :wink:

[Magnockman]

Making the small nock solid shouldn't have any affect on the shaft. Our small nocks where bending at the weakest point where the walls were the thinnest. After examining G-nocks a little closer they increased the thickness of the plastic in the same place we were having problems. They have been making nocks much longer and I