Tilt Tamer?

[Gary Petts]

Always looking for new shiny things to spend money on and this morning I've already ordered the Trueshot coach grip gadget Robert43 found which looks fantastic to stop me gripping the bow. Thanks Robert for that link.

Would you believe it, I followed a link from that site to a link on another and now I've come up with the Tilt Tamer http://www.tilttamer.com/default.asp

Looks impressive to me (a person who relies on professionals to tune my bows but can tie a D Loop under strict supervision) and in my uneducated opinion, the potential is perhaps phenomenal to combine this with the other gadget I've already bought today and actually get negative torque where I'd be fighting the bow to stop the arrows drilling the X ring. However, before I reach for the credit card can someone who knows about bow tuning and the science/physics behind these sorts of things give me some advice on whether it would be likely to work or not? Thanks.

[Nock Hunter]

Gary, you need to speak to "Rocketrod" he has been shooting one for awhile now.

[slick]

Bowtech have had the concept on some of their bows for a couple of years http://www.bowtecharchery.com/#/tech...technology&i=6

[Scoot]

Its strange when something like this comes out you tend to read a lot of positive feed back then all of a sudden someone specks the truth and everyone gets on the band wagon.
With the tilt tamer i can't remember reading anything negative, Been thinking of getting one myself just to see if every thing they say is true.

I can't see any reason why it wouldn't do what they say and like slick said other bow companies have similar things.

[James Park]

However, will it really add to the accuracy?
I would suspect not.

[markjam51]

I would have thought one of the most consistent things in archery would be the torque induced by a cable guard - it is entirely mechanical in nature would have to be exactly the same very shot. If it is, what difference can it possibly make eliminating it?

[scott p]

I tend to look at such "innovations" and wonder if they're a response to a genuine problem, or a gimmick someone is searching for a way to justify. realistically, if you're not seeing them on bows that are in the hands of people winning competitions, you have to ask their worth.

[Scoot]

Tim Gillingham wins a few shoots every now and then and he uses one

[James Park]

I have analysed the forces from the cables in a lot of detail (and measured them).
You can find the maths in my published papers.
Interestingly, the maximum dynamic cable forces occur just as the string reaches the rest position during the power stroke - not at full draw.
At that time it is, of course, essential that the cables be out of the way of the arrow.
Consequently, devices such as this one do little to minimise the substantial side forces on the bow during the power stroke.
I do not plan to use one.

[Scoot]

I would have thought one of the most consistent things in archery would be the torque induced by a cable guard - it is entirely mechanical in nature would have to be exactly the same very shot. If it is, what difference can it possibly make eliminating it?

The whole bow is mechanical therefor any changes you do to the bow would be pointless, the best way to be more accurate is to shoot it better.

I wonder what components bolted to a bow actually improve the bows accuracy given that the bow is shot out of a machine i would think the only device would be an arrow rest.

[markjam51]

The whole bow is mechanical therefor any changes you do to the bow would be pointless, the best way to be more accurate is to shoot it better.

I wonder what components bolted to a bow actually improve the bows accuracy given that the bow is shot out of a machine i would think the only device would be an arrow rest.

If you read James's papers that is pretty much the conclusion he reaches. But no doubt some things are inherently more consistent. Using your example of the arrow rest, a blade type rest will shoot the same way every time - but some of the more mechanical ones may not, and a drop away for example can get out of tune relatively easily. and some cam types - say twin cam bows get out of synch relatively easily too.

[James Park]

Here are the cable and string tensions for my old AR34 single cam bow.
As you can see, the maximum tensions are just near the end of the bow's power stroke.
You get the maximum dynamic torque applied to the bow from the cables at that time.
The static force from the cable is also high at full draw.

Consequently:
The device mentioned in this thread will reduce the torque at full draw, but not near the end of the power stroke.
That means that the shift of the arrows on the target shown on the web site is quite real.
However, the major influence on the arrow behaviour is the torque near the end of the power stroke, not the static force at full draw, and the device does nothing for that.

Aside from that, all my testing shows that the arrows can be expected to group well in any case.

(For those not used to Newtons, divide by about 10 and you have kilograms.)

[scott p]

Tim Gillingham wins a few shoots every now and then and he uses one

yeah, I think he spruiks them from memory? it's obviously not counterproductive as he demonstrates, just a little doubtful of the actual vs perceived benefits.

[dbjac]

Hrmm.
As long as it is in the same place, there will be no problem. If it moves, there will be. From what I've been told (correct me if I'm wrong) this is the reason Dave and other big Hoyt names pushed for the straight bars and why Hoyt moved to the straight carbon.
I assume this is pretty rigid? It would suck to add a point of failure to the system.

Interestingly, in Croatia at the World Cup this year, Ivana Buden had sanded her guard down in the middle to about half the thickness in from the inside of the bow. The guard was able to flex quite a bit, much like the 'Bowtech' flexguard (except a conventional slide). Not sure if she's still using it though.

[Harrison Ooi]

However, will it really add to the accuracy?
I would suspect not.

My sentiments exactly...

[Scoot]

correct me if i am wrong, if you have a correctly spine arrow doesn't it only touch the rest at the point of release.
i.e bend vertical over the rest then bends again as the fletches clear the rest.

If this is correct then the only time the arrow touches the bow (or should) is in the first few milli seconds of release.
The relevance of the torque from the cable guard would then only effect the pressure on the grip (which in my opinion is very unpredictable) and the contact of the arrow on the string as it moves forward. The device would then lessen the side ways pressure from the cable guard at full draw allowing the sight to become more inline with the string.

Just a foot note Tim Gillingham doesn't say that this device improved his accuracy.

[James Park]

Generally the arrow sits on the launcher for quite a long time.
The cable force near the end of the power stroke applies a significant rotation to the bow just before the arrow leaves the string. This is applied to the nock-end of the arrow and significantly influences the arrow behaviour - regardless of whether the arrow is on the launcher at that time or not.

[wareagle]

I can see the advantage of having 'Old Buck's' Tilt Tamer...especially for a problem bow with excessive cam lean.

[scott p]

Just a foot note Tim Gillingham doesn't say that this device improved his accuracy.

if the answer wasn't blindingly obvious you'd have to ask why he was representing it then.

I think that leaves me fairly firmly back with the personal position that if a similar gadget is not on a top-end bow from the factory, and I'm not seeing them on the podium, they're the archery equivalent of a fishing lure - designed more to catch fishermen than fish.

[markjam51]

if the answer wasn't blindingly obvious you'd have to ask why he was representing it then.

I think that leaves me fairly firmly back with the personal position that if a similar gadget is not on a top-end bow from the factory, and I'm not seeing them on the podium, they're the archery equivalent of a fishing lure - designed more to catch fishermen than fish.

I tend to agree with you for slightly different reasons.

It seems to me that this is a case of someone identifying a “phenomenon” that occurs when the bow is drawn - what is known as “cable guard torque" - and then coming to the conclusion “that must be bad” and the “phenomenon” becomes a “problem” that has to be fixed somehow.

There is a video on youtube or the Bowtech website that shows a bow in a hooter shooter with a laser pointer on the riser. I can’t find it at the moment but will post it when I remember where it is. As the bow is drawn the static weight on the cables increases reaching a max as the bow lets off and all the weight is on the cables. Because the cables are offset to the right hand side of the riser/limb structure there is a horizontal pull on the cams and thus the limb tips from the cables to the right. This pulls the limbs a little off centre to the right as they flex back and down. But as the pull on the string keeps pulling the limb tips back in line with the line of force between the D loop and the pivot point on the grip this pull to the right manifests itself in the cable guard coming left which twists the riser to clockwise and you see the dot on the wall from the laser pointer move right.

The video then shows how the flexible Bowtech cable guard more than halves the amount of movement of the laser dot to the right and claims that this improves accuracy.

When I first saw this I thought wow - that is a real “problem” and the flexible cable guard really makes a difference. When I saw the tilt-tamer I thought wow, that will eliminate “the problem” pretty much altogether on my current bow.

However, if you really think about it it’s not really a “problem” - it’s a phenomenon that results from all the forces involved. It is entirely predictable and it happens the same way and to the same degree every time. It does not need to be “solved.” It just needs to be taken into account - by simply adjusting the windage of your sight - so that you aim in the right place having regards to the “phenomenon.” Your sight does not need to be perfectly in line with the arrow for you to be accurate. You don't even have to conscioulsy do it. It happens as you adjust after each shot until you are happy with your windage. And when you walk along the shooting line you will see that pretty much everyone's sights are sightly offset as a consequence of this phenomenon.

If you really think it is a “problem” then you should go to a shoot through system that totally eliminates “the problem”. The tilt tamer and the flex guard only partly eliminate “the problem”.

The other thing is the rotational force caused by the dynamic loading of the cables JP talks about that reaches it’s maximum just before the arrow leaves the bow. If that is considered to be a problem then neither device addresses that at all, so again it would probably pay to go the shoot through approach if you want to minimise that.

Of course, if you truly think it is a problem, then of course it is a problem, because it’s affecting your thinking and confidence so you should buy one if that is the case.

End of sermon.