I'm still a touch sore and spent from an intense workout with the Mighty Kraken last night and was going to just relax and do some lightweight form work with the 36# Black Thunderstorm a bit this evening but?....I've had some questions gnawing at me in the back of my archery infected mind and tonight?...I decided to get some answers.
Mainly?...I was wondering how the 66"/40#@28" Big Jim Buffalo Magnum might stack up against the mighty 68"/46#@28" Timberpoint Kraken.
Part of me said that the 6# advantage the Kraken has over The Buf "MIGHT BE" offset a bit by the fact that the BufMag is of a R/D design while the Kraken is of a D (when strung) profile.
But then?...I needed to take into account that while the 68" Kraken has a 25" riser (making the bow about 65% "Limb") the 66" Buffalo Magnum only has an 18" riser making it a very limby bow at nearly 75% "Limb".
Well since I feel enough time has been given to give most folks a chance to comment?...Time for me to weigh in with a response of my take on the test of these bows.
If you are one of the folks who found the results of either of these fine bows lackluster FPS wise?...
"I Understand"
after all?...both are bearers of names that have reached near legendary status with nary a foul word rendered with regards too any of their attributes by many happy owners of such...so expectations?....were already geared too the high side via social osmosis so with that out of the way?...here's my thoughts...
"The Timberpoint Kraken"
I'll make no excuses for The Mighty Kraken as it continues to impress me in every way as when a D (when strung) Longbow has the ability to to cast 9.3GPP arrows across the beams at a very consistent 171fps and can send a 5.9GPP arrow at 202-203FPS without putting up a fuss?...for a D-Longbow that's absolutely "Smoking" as far as I'm concerned.
"Big Jim's Buffalo Magnum"
And here's where "I Am Going To Make Excuses"...but in my mind?...they are very valid and more like reasons rather than excuses as follows....
Big Jim openly admits that "he doesn't chase speed" in the design of his bows...and these TWO longbows represent TWO very different animals built by TWO very different "Goal Oriented" Bowyers.
Where Jaco is all about extreme performance and well settled accuracy and aims to make his mark in the highest levels of International Longbow Competition?...Big Jim had other venues in mind where his Buffalo Magnum is more geared towards the Bow Hunters amidst us...so BOTH Bowyer's had "EXTREMELY DIFFERENT"...yet very well defined objectives in mind in the design of these two vastly different, yet very refined bows as follows...
Where Jaco used an extremely heavy 25" riser with shorter, snappier limbs for optimum performance resulting in a 3 1/4LB and massive risered Longbow with little to no regard for how much noise it made at the shot with a "The Heavier The Better" mentality?...
Big Jim knows the importance of a quiet shooting bow in close quarters hunting situations...He also knows "Every Ounce Matters" when you're chasing Elk at high altitudes...and?...he also knows how stiffened up a bow hunter can get when sitting a blind or stand for hours on end in sub-freezing temps...so his Buffalo Magnum dons an 18" riser of diminutive proportions which he blessed with long, limber......"Draw Friendly Limbs". :)
So what we're really looking at here?...is a high end competition longbow VS a high end hunting longbow...where there were extreme "mission specific" design biases incorporated in each pending venue.
So is the Buffalo Magnum slower?...absolutely NOT!...and despite it's lithe mass and long, limber limbs?...it IS church fart quiet at the shot and extremely smooth throughout the draw as opposed too the high strung and rather obnoxious shot note of the Kraken.
And now?...let's take a deeper look at the Buffalo Magnum before anyone dubs it "A Slow Bow" shall we?...so let's do this...let's take the 171FPS (of the heavier 430gr arrows) and divide it by the Kraken's DW of 46# where we get a performance factor of....
171fps/46#s ='s 3.717FPS per Lb of DW
and then?..
let's divide the 159FPS by the Buffalo Magnums 40# DW where we get a performance factor of...
159fps/40#'s ='s 3.975FPS per LB of DW
and suddenly it turns out?...the long and limber "Very Draw Friendly"...R/D limbs of the Buffalo Magnum aren't so slow after all now are they?
Where the Buffalo Magnums 3.975FPSPP performance yield bests the Krakens 3.717FPSPP by over 1/4FPS...per pound of DW.
Sometimes things aren't always what they seem? LOL!
Not too shabby for a light, ultra smooth drawing R/D hunting rig that's whisper quiet at the shot now is it? ;)
I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express yet some seem to have admiration in regards too my abilities of mathematical induction and observation as it relates too archery and?....bow performance.
Whelp?...I think I've had more than my fair say on the matter...hope you enjoyed and?...
The speed numbers might be mediocre at best but I don't think that old bale in the backyard will care one way or another. I'm more surprised that tank of a Kraken doesn't vibrate the tips off shooting sub 6gpp arrows. I wonder if Jaco has a recommendation on min arrow weight?
Jinks: You get to the meat of the matter when you compute the speed per pound of bow weight. There's really little difference between the bows when you do that.
The speed differences you found resulted largely from differences in bow weight rather than bow design. And, the extremely fast speed was just due to a very light arrow, about 5.5 gpp.
"I'm more surprised that tank of a Kraken doesn't vibrate the tips off shooting sub 6gpp arrows. I wonder if Jaco has a recommendation on min arrow weight?"
As mentioned, I don't strive to be the fastest bow on the market as I'm a firm believer with every gain, there is something else left behind. But for the record, I want to point something out that will save me countless hours on the phone trying to explain this to those who may not understand the results as they are compaired....apples and oranges and by the way, i'm not surprised that the buffalo showed such slow numbers in this test.
I haven't seen mentioned the draw length used for comparison, but knowing Jinkster personally, it probably isn't over 27-28"s.
A 60" or 62" bow would have faired much more favorably in the test. My 66" buff has a 17" riser and 24.5" working limbs...much better for a draw length of 31" or longer. The Kracken has a working limb of 21.5".
The Kracken may have likely still edged me out if compaired to a more suitable bow of mine for but the results would have been closer.
Most bows of decent design will group up with similar results if they are allowed to be paired properly...just not that many differences to make one pull ahead of the field by leaps and bounds...unless 8-10 fps is a leap or bound to you.
If you do the math in my results posted above?...where my Buffalo Magnum bested the Kraken via "VELOCITY too DW" ratios?...where the Buffalo Magnum R/D limbs delivered 3.975FPS PER POUND OF DW?...
This means that a Buffalo Magnum of equal DW too the Kraken would has smoked the Kraken D-Longbow profile by a good margin like so...
46# Buffalo Magnum ×'s 3.975fps per pound would equal....
182.85fps as opposed too the 46# Kraken's 176fps with those same 430gr/9.349GPP arrows....IOW's?...you killed it without even trying Big guy! ;)
And as far as me opting for that 66" length?...I love every inch of it and knew the d@mn thing was sold 2"s before the string met my anchor on that first late night draw...freaking thing drew like butter with a cotton candy soft back end to pull through! :)
I'm done with toothpick bows...I like my Longbows to be...well?...
Miss typo on the Kraken fps...171fps not 176...which would have a Buffalo Magnum of equal DW 11FPS FASTER than the Kraken. ;)
One of the first things i do with a bow is slow it down It is much better to have a stable shooting platform than an eratic rocket launcher!
If one is going to engadge in testing then it is only fair to the bow builders that we respect their craft and use like equipment, using extrapulation to come up with numberthat have not been shot in the real world is a very shady gray area!!!!
1st?...I need to point out that you're calling straight up basic math a "Shady gray area"?...the calculations were done using the actual output of each bow using the same arrow by dividing the chronographed FPS by the actual DW of each bow.
2ndly?...it should come as little surprise that a R/D profile bow bested a straight up D-Longbow where arrow velocity is concerned.
I know you're a fan of Jaco and his Timberpoint bows as am I but?...facts is facts and fact is?...this was an Apples/Oranges comparo but it did point out the two very different mission specific nuances of both bows and their respective Bowyers alike.
Well Dana?...the way I see it?..."The Human Element"...shot (2) "Duplicate Speeds" with (2) different bows and the ones that weren't duplicates?...were within 1FPS of each other.
The other thing here is...you're right Dana....this is not the ultimate in scientifically controlled testing....(which is often times not repeatable afield in real life application)...which that last part?...my testing is..."real life application"...where in my world?...it's called...
"Applied Science"
Outside of conjuring up marketing hype and feeding fodder too an advertising dept.?..I see little value in what numbers are derived from a "Shooting Machine" as I do not hunt nor compete with my bows lashed to one...but I do find value in knowing what sort of performance output I'm actually getting when I'm the Indian behind the string...as is in real life application.
But standby my friend as I approach this "Basic Math" from another direction where I've assembled some 372gr arrows for the Buffalo Magnum...which represents exactly 9.3GPP on the BufMag just like the 430gr arrows make for 9.3GPP off the 46# Kraken...so tomorrow morning?..they go head-too-head at 9.3GPP...so maybe we can see ho accurate "Basic Math" is...or?....isn't..but my monies on the math! LOL! ;)
That's why you have to be careful posting these larks- people really take it seriously and it can affect bowyers like BigJim.Id like to see the old Morrison vs BJ more like similar veggies at least.From a scientific view its just an enthusiastic lark.
Backyard testing and backyard math with the bow of the week. Jinks, you don't hunt or compete whatsoever so a controlled test with a shooting machine would benefit you the most...at least until the next new and shiny thing arrives.
Ya know folks?...I have no clue what drives the certain few to perpetually put as dark a spin on things as they can but I do know what drives me to conduct loosely run, real life application tests such as these....
"FUN"
and?...
"Learning"
Had I not actually taken a little time and effort to do what I've done here by pitting these two very different Longbows against each other I may have never really gleaned "To What Degree" such things as...
Just how quiet BJ's Buffalo Magnum is as compared too the Kraken or?....
Just how "Vibe Free" and settled at the shot the Kraken is as compared too the BufMag or?....
Recognize just how close Jaco Wessels has come to getting an R/D bow level of performance out of what is a D-(when strung)Longbow and imho?...that's quite the accomplishment.
Matter fact?...EITHER of these Longbows out performs some of the "Lesser Than" wood/glass Recurves I've owned.
And here's what else I know...The coffee's on...the suns coming up...and in about an hour?...the chrono is coming out...where is seems rather than these two bows?...It's my...
"Basic Math"
That will be put too the test where my claim is that is evenly pitted against the Kraken?...be it via equal DW or using this method of "Equal GPP"?.....
Where the 46# Kraken shot a very consistent 171fps with 430gr/9.3GPP arrows? (while the 40# BufMag registered 159fps with those same 430gr/10.75GPP arrows)
I (and my basic math) predict that with these 372gr/9.3GPP arrows?....The BufMag is going to best the Kraken's 171fps....as it should...(pitting a D-longbow against an R/D Longbow) but?...they are two D2mn Great Bows made by two very driven Bowyers so?..I guess anything is possible but we'll see. ;)
BOX CALL: Thanks man and yeah....with everyone mentioning that and my bad machine shop ears?...I went back and turned the volume way up to detect what it was you folks were hearing that I wasn't which then?...jarred my failing memory! LOL!
And ya know what that was folks?...that was a Shrub Jay giving a Squirrel heck for getting too close! LOL!
Listen closer with the volume up?...and you'll hear the Squirrel chattering back! LOL!
4t5: "I still want a THUNDERCHILD"
and I don't blame ya!...a it's fine hunt'in bow the TC is!
and imho?...comparing one here in this mix would then make this an "Apples/Oranges/Peaches" sort of test! LOL!
With my diminishing health and energy levels?...hunting is off my menu and pretty much has been since 2005...the last time my father and I walked out of the whitetail woods together but?...if I were ever to climb up a tree into a stand again or?...crawl into a blind?...I couldn't think of a better companion to have than a Big Jim's Thunderchild...loved mine! :)
The Leatherwall is a more informative and interesting place with vids like the ones you take the time to put up Jinks, thanks for the interesting videos and keep them coming
I had a request to ensure BH was the same on both bows...it is...both bows are Braced @ 7 3/4"s.
In that same request?...it was asked of me to "Count Strands" to which I ruled that out as while I have no clue what either are made of?...yet both were supplied from both bows respective Bowyers?...Big Jim's string is of many skinny strands (twisted up tight) while Jaco's string is of fewer fatter strands.
Now I did think about removing the strings from the bows and "Weighing Them" but?...I have tip protectors on both bows and one type (From American Leathers) is Reeeal nice but?...not all that R&R Friendly and besides?...I'm just not all that concerned about that...but I did take some pix because while Jaco's string is a touch larger in diameter?...
In this close-up I noticed that in my excitement?...I completely forgot to ever wax the string on the Buffalo Magnum so while it is a touch skinnier?...I'm calling it pretty much "Even Up" where strings are concerned based on "The Fuzz Factor" alone! LOL!
Seems I have a string to wax today...also?...it might be...
Noted: That both strings are equipped with wool puffs both fabricated and installed by Big Jim himself.
Where it occurred to me that the 430gr arrows shot off the 46# Kraken DIDN'T represent 9.3GPP "EXACTLY"...so I did the math and it was more like...
9.348GPP
nearly 1/2 GPP more than 9.3GPP...which meant that 372gr arrows off the Buffalo Magnum was a touch lighter....and they needed to be 374grs to be exact...so I fixed that...by adding some wraps of painters tape like so...
Gotta tell ya folks...I'm still blown away at this mornings results...but the only thing I'm actually disappointed with here is the failure of my own applied math where it seems that once one starts flexing exotic lams over CF laced bamboo cores?...ya might as well "Ditch The Calculator" because the only thing that will remain consistent?..."is change"...and in that realization?...I couldn't help but snicker a little inside recalling many instances of even well experienced Bowyer's expressing great angst in often times..."Missing Weight"...on a bow build...where if my butt end user experiences are any indication?...I can see where "Hitting DW" is definitely a hit or miss nightmare for them.
But I still stand by my opinion that both of these bows are excellent executions of and top shelf examples for the specific venues they were intended for where I also learned (yet once again) that when it comes to single strings bows?...
"There's No Free Lunch": and to an immense degree?...you're only going to get out of them what you physically put into them...and where I'm "Going To Work" a mere 2"s into the draw on the short limbed Kraken?...The purposely purchased "Long For Me" Buffalo Magnum draws like I'm taking a vacation...and I'm cool with that too! :)
One area in this testing (that revealed itself to me as a matter of course) was that I just couldn't ignore the rather large disparity between the Kraken and the Buffalo Magnums sensitivity levels to changes in arrow weight...for instance?...
While the Kraken shot the 430gra arrows at 171fps?...it flat out smoked the 270gr arrows at 202-203fps...representing a 30fps difference between the two arrow weights where the Buffalo Magnum?...wasn't quite so responsive too such shooting the 430gr arrows at 159fps but then only mustered up 183-184fps...exhibiting only 24fps "Less Difference" between the two arrow weights tested...5-6fps "Less Of A Difference" than the Kraken exhibited...or in mathematical terms?...nearly 17% less difference...yet when perfectly matched GPP wise they both shot the same exact speeds?...so imho?...there's more too this story but I do believe some of it...
"Does Meet The Eye"
which now has me looking at "The Tips" of both these bows where the comparatively bulbous antelope horn tips on the Buffalo Magnum absolutely dwarf that of the Kraken's tips by 3-4 fold.
So the question that now begs to be answered in my mind is?...
"Is it THE MASS of the Buffalo Magnums tips that seem to make it less sensitive to changes in arrow weight?"
Seems to me that further testing is nearly obligatory at this point and will involve some extremely heavy arrows. ;)
Your comparison of fps/lb of draw weight was skewed to start because you compared two different gpp values. By doing that you ignored the fact that bows harness more energy as arrow weight increases. As you get further up in arrow weight you'll see smaller changes in speed as arrow mass increases. In other words, the bow is utilizing the stored energy more efficiently. That's why you have to compare apples to apples.
What you may be seeing between the two bows isn't related to limb shape, it's related to stored energy and efficiency. Some bows can go lower in arrow weight and keep the speed up because they transfer that energy well, others not so well. Some bows store more energy and even if they aren't as efficient can still produce more speed.
Lots of factors can affect speed changes. Try matching gpp before when doing comparisons. Comparing one bow at 5.8 and 9.3 gpp will yield different results compared to 6.8 and 10.7. The bow shooting the heavier arrows will have a slight advantage in regards to efficiency.
pretty much?..."The Works"...you name it?...and it was different between these two bows...but the way I saw it?...that was pretty much the point of me making a comparison between them as it amplified and debuted which attributes of each could be exploited and benefited from the most whereby?...
It just became glaringly apparent that while the Buffalo Magnum pretty much shirks off the mass of increased arrow weight?...the Kraken really shines bright with the lighter fodder yet is far more sensitive too arrow weight than is the Buffalo Magnum and?...
Once again?...I feel this is a real cool feature in that "Hunters" can greatly increase the lethal effectiveness of their Buffalo Magnums using the optimum in large grain broad heads on heavy weight arrows and do so at minuscule costs too their arrows speed and trajectory while the "Field Competitors" among us should be seeking to use the lightest woodies possible on their mighty Timberpoint Krakens because?...Both Shine As Described! :)
I just put some 525gr arrows across the beams off both bows.
The arrows are 29 1/2" Long GT 5575's donning 250gr screw-in points putting the...
46# Kraken: @ 525gr/11.4GPP
and the...
40# Buffalo Magnum: @ 525gr/13.125GPP
Video Results are uploading now and all I can say is...
If I ever get a shot at getting in the hunting woods again?...
I want me some 300gr Broadheads For my Buffalo Magnum! :)
I have always been told bows with less working limb "cast" a lighter arrow better while a bow with more working limb "casts" a heavier hunting arrow better."Cast" is more subjective though.
Jinkster, just keep doing what your doing. I for one love watching and learning. There will always be ones who if you gave them a Million dollars they would cry and complain you didn't give them two Million.
Whittler & Flash: Thanks guys...I love "The Learning" too! :)
Funny how some feel Longbows and Recurves yo be "So Simplistic" as compared to modern compounds yet when one delves deep into things and begins discovering the vastly different results, responses and effects that changes in things like..
Riser Length
Riser Weight
Limb Length
Bow Length
Riser Profile (Deflex?/Reflex?/Straight?)
Limb Profile
Riser Window Cut (Before?/Center?/Past?)
and now I believe I'm even witnessing a marked change in character attributes over limb tip mass?..and then to consider the infinite combinations of the above one might conjure up and suddenly?...Longbows and Recurves aren't nearly so simplistic as ones initial presumptions might infer...matter fact?...as I'm finding?...quite the opposite.
Matter fact?...(as I type this?)....yet another thought comes too mind whereby?...
"The Buffalo Magnums Riser Window is Cut-Past-Center"
Which gets the arrow closer too center-shot than what the Kraken allows....which in turn gets the strings energy behind the arrow in a more direct and efficient fashion.
as it seems the only thing more infinite than single string bow designs is learning more about them! ;)
"I think this is why the highest performance limbs are moving toward the smallest limb tips possible while still maintaining durability"
Funny you mention that as some of the highest performing limbs on the market at this moment are "MK Veracity" limbs...where I was kind of blown away to see that it appears they opted to go with a white phenolic tips (rather than a build-up of solid CF layers like both my RCX100 and Kaya Kstorm limbs are) but it appears they actually...."Added A Bit Of White Phenolic Mass"...too the tips.
Maybe MK has seen..."the value of"...and opted to tap into and incorporate a dash of something the ancients once employed?...
Adding mass too horsebow tips seemed a popular well adopted practice because while it does sap a bit of energy to get them moving?...once "On The Move"?...they seem to add quite a bit more "Kick At The End" when it comes to casting heavier arrows...where I might add?....it's those heavier arrows that effectively subdue those amplified vibes those who did not choose their arrow weight wisely often times feel and complain about. ;)
Obviously I am talking about the typical bow.I've never handled or shot a horsebow or Asiatic composite.Jinks Im surprised you don't have one you could compare shooting a thumbring to a D bow.That might be apples and corn on the cob.
Keep in mind that only recently?...it seems commercial archery equipment vendors have whittled down the word "Performance" as relating too "Arrow Velocity Only"
and while living in a world where the lightest, fastest, CF arrows rule as King.
seems to me not all the marketeers are actual archers...where all other aspects (they have no clue about) get pushed aside and all but forgotten about as they engage in commercial speed wars.
to sell chit.
I have some .500 spine Victory 3DHV shafts that weigh an amazingly light 5.0gpi...they represent the lightest, fastest shafting I've ever owned however?...
I'm pretty sure that if I tried hard enough?...I could crush one between my fingers and I'd d@mn sure never attempt to shoot a living creature with one...they are "Foam Only"..."CF Straws"...and?...
The same bow with tips light enough that would optimize the speed of those arrows?...is not the same bow that would do very well at all casting heavy shafts with monster sized broadheads.
and "That"...is what this thread is becoming about. ;)
nolz...as much as I love checking out different makes and models of bows?...I'm not interested in owning or shooting the Asiatics at all...not even a little bit.
Now a real nice, light draw, horn tipped ELB of yew?...
Jinks, this one was killed with an x impact 500 shaft, 5.7gpi. This guy is considerably harder to penetrate than a whitetail. 320gr arrow out of 50ish pounds. By the way, 202-205 fps range when tested.
Jinks, this one was killed with an x impact 500 shaft, 5.7gpi. This guy is considerably harder to penetrate than a whitetail. 320gr arrow out of 50ish pounds. By the way, 202-205 fps range when tested.
Jinks, this one was killed with an x impact 500 shaft, 5.7gpi. This guy is considerably harder to penetrate than a whitetail. 320gr arrow out of 50ish pounds. By the way, 202-205 fps range when tested.
"Have fun Jinskster! Please kill something with one of these rigs! Testing is interesting but there ain't nothing like the real thing baby!"
Speaking as an old guy who's vacations where persistent hunting trips away from my family with my father?...for decades of my life?..."I Lived for The Next Hunt"
But now?...while the manly man in me would offer up a knee jerk response of..."I'd Love To!"?...truth is?...I wouldn't...and if I did tread into the woods in search of creatures?...I would actually prefer to be armed with a good camera...I guess I'm softening up in my old age as I begin to realize my own mortality.
Where another stark reality I'm faced with these days is?...in my poor health and physical condition?...there's days I'm challenged to drag full trash cans out to the end of my driveway...I can't imagine me attempting to drag out that fine hog you arrowed above and I just thank God for not taking away my ability to still shoot my bows in my backyard...on "Good days"...that said?..on with the thread...
Where I would like to let it be known folks that for those who may not be aware?...This Jaco Wessels of Timberpoint Bows is no "Hobby Bowyer" I pitted Big Jim's Buffalo Magnum against and as a matter of fact?...is a premier Bowyer of International Acclaim on the Competitive D-Longbow Circuit who's Kraken Longbow is arguably one of (if not) "The Most Sought After Competition D-Longbows" worldwide.
So in light of the above?...it should shed some serious light on just what sort of accomplishment Big Jim has unwittingly achieved here with his Buffalo Magnum series of bows in this thread...and I also thought you all might find the following 3 pic comparison very interesting so here goes...
All this while I've referred too the Buffalo Magnum as a "R/D Longbow" and the Kraken as a "D-Longbow"...where again?...Jaco is no rookie at this by any stretch of the imagination and as a result?..has exploited every ounce of performance possible in the design of his Kraken D-Longbow...which is a type of bow archers commonly refer to as....
"A STEALTH D-Longbow"
where in well thought out and developed tapering of his limbs?...Jaco was able to "HIDE" an abundance of R/D geometry in his Krakens Limb Profiles...clearly exhibited in this comparison pic of both bows....side by side...in an un-strung static state...
In this next pic?...we can clearly see where while...
Big Jim's 66"/17" risered Buffalo Magnum has long since turned into limb?...The BufMag becomes "Limb" about the same place the 68"/25" risered Kraken "Just Begins" it's "Fades"....
And while doing this un-strung side-by-side comparo photo shoot?...it was also brought to me attention that while the Buffalo Magnums shelf measures out to be about 1 1/2"s above center (measuring string nock too shelf from both ends while braced)...the Krakens shelf is only about 1" above center.
What's this mean?...I have no clue...so I tried to find out by drawing both bows with a very high wrist with nothing but the web of my bow hand buried in the throat of both bows grips where I drew them each both split-finger and 3under paying close attention to any "Balance Variations" throughout the entire draw cycle and?...
While both of these (too the long side) Longbows seemed fine when drawn wboth ways?...
The longer risered, shorter limbed Kraken did display a preference for 3under while the Buffalo Magnums limbs are so long and limber?...despite it being 2"s shorter in overall length?...I was unable to detect a difference in balance of the bow when drawn to anchor either way...split-finger or 3under it remained dead vertical.
all I got for today folks but it's been a very interesting and informative weekend for me getting to know more about these two fine bows particularities.
Hope you enjoyed and thanks for reading along. L8R, Bill.:)
I don't follow along much as I'm getting ready for my own real life broad head test on moose. I have seen it mentioned that the big horn tips would add a lot of weight to the tips. I am certain that this would be true if they were just laid over the top of the existing reinforcement. I can't speak for everyone, but I actually displace some of the much heavier glass in the tips with the considerably lighter horn. I'm sure most do the same. I believe they are still slightly heavier than the standard tips due to overall size but feel the difference to be insignificant. No matter, I will continue as before to always put horn on my personal bows because it looks so d@m good. The bow I will anchor a moose with next week just so happens to have moose antler tips ;) For everyone else, I know no bowyer that wouldn't offer horn less tips if asked. BigJim
My own opinion on the "kick at the end" scenario is that while there is a n intuitive sense that it is so, it just ain't so.
The limbs are storing X amount of energy. That energy will be used to propel forward the limbs, the string and the arrow. Increasing the weight of any of those three without increasing the amount of energy stored in the limbs will result in less arrow speed.
Most archers are readily familiar with the fact that increasing arrow weight will decrease velocity as well as increasing string weight will. Adding weight to the bow tips will have the same result.
The only kick at the end is likely to be felt in the bow hand.
I'm not endorsing speed as the measure of performance. I'm a heavy arrow guy!
So does all this mean I can replace the 5lb head on my sledgehammer with a 16oz ballpeen head and still drive my 1/2" rebar 3D animal stakes in the dirt just as efficiently because of increased hammer head speed? LOL!!!
Just asking...cause my swing speed gets awful slow by about the 2nd stake! LOL!
The limb tip mass thing?...it's not efficient energy but some do refer to it as...."Inertia" ;)
Exactly. Most bowyer's could build a bow that performs better but they wisely choose to make small (very small) sacrifices for aesthetics. To appeal to their customers or themselves, either way it's all good stuff.
"Just asking...cause my swing speed gets awful slow by about the 2nd stake! LOL!
The limb tip mass thing?...it's not efficient energy but some do refer to it as...."Inertia" ;)
Your stake driving brings up the same question we ask ourselves about arrow weight. Do we want it to get there fast or keep on going once it makes contact?
The truth is, I was trying to bait you into doing a velocity comparison of a bow with and without weights attached to the tips. Are you up for it?
I hereby disclaims all responsibility for damage to the bow.
"The truth is, I was trying to bait you into doing a velocity comparison of a bow with and without weights attached to the tips. Are you up for it?"
Funny you mention that...as I mulled over doing exactly that today by slipping a couple 100gr points in some tubing (to protect the Krakens belly side surfaces) and taping (1) 100gr point to each end of the Kraken about 1" below the string nocks on the belly side then running those 525gr arrows over the chrono again...and while it wouldn't be a "Tell All"?...it would serve to be a...
"Tell Some"
I believe that all we really do have to date?...are bits and pieces of "The Truth"...where even here I'm only touching on hints that there is such a thing as a "Ratio & Proportion" deal out there that would in fact...
"Optimize Arrow Weight As Matched To Any Particular Bow"
We've seen here in this thread that even though it logged the fastest speeds with extremely light arrows?...(as it should having a 6# DW advantage)...the Kraken lost 43-44fps going from a 270gr arrow too a 525gr arrow while the Buffalo Magnum?...only lost 31-32fps doing the same...representing a 25% different and to me?...
"25% IS Significant"
We often times read and hear folks laying down slick talk about "Stored" energy (as it pertains to limbs)...but what I'm taking an in depth look at here is...
How Efficiently Does That Stored Energy Actually Get...
"DELIVERED"?
So why is the 40# bow only losing 31fps between these extreme arrow weight differences while the 46# bow is losing a whopping 44fps?
Yet they both shot exactly the same speeds when GPP was matched exactly with a moderate weight of 9.3GPP?
And then the Kraken lost a whopping 12fps from that going too a 525gr/11.4GPP while the BufMag only lost 7fps with those same 525gr arrows at 13.125GPP?
So sump'ins up here...sort of reminds me of "Top End HP VS Low End Torque" talks with my old motor-head buds...or?...the difference between..."Blazing Fast Or Stump Pulling Power".
But getting back to you baiting question?...I decided against it...I'm just not willing to risk the Krakens dainty CF backed boo limbs to any heavy metal testing cause if I did destroy the Kraken in an act of foolish point proving?...I'd arrest myself for crimes against humanity! LOL!
It was cool of Big Jim to enlighten us about Antelope Horn being lighter than Glass/Phenolic Tip material but the advantage I have is the fact that I can compare both bows right here...side-by-side...real time...where despite whatever weight certain materials are?...it's glaringly apparent to me which bows limbs is swinging more weight at the business end of the limbs so I took two more comparison pics to add some perspective too this conversation...here's one...
The heavy limb tips on the buff stand out immediately.
I'm thinking the kraken is getting short changed on the draw.
Here is my idea for a fair comparison. If we had an FD curve on both bows, we could identify the exact draw length at which each bow has reached its most efficient point of energy storage. IOW, when they just begin to stack.
Then repeat the original comparison at the draw length and draw weight indicated by the FD curves.
"I'm thinking the kraken is getting short changed on the draw."
I'm one of those open-minded and honest buttheads! LOL!
So?...not only will I not deny the above statement?..I'll freaking.....
"CONFIRM IT FOR YOU!" LOL!
I've been at this long enough to know...
"I'm only Flesh & Bone"
IOW's?..."I Squish"
So no matter how rock solid my form feels or is?...the more DW a bow is?...the more it...
"Compresses My Body"
Give me a 35# Bow?...and I'm a 28 1/2" Draw all day long...give me a 40# Bow?...and I'm a 28" DL archer...and at 45#'s plus?...
I'm in the 27 1/2"-27 3/4" DL range.
If you're human?...with every added pound of DW your bow arm compresses and your string arm stretches and?...DL diminishes with bows of greater poundage.
I bet I'm about a 26" DL archer with 100+# Warbow! LOL!
make of it what you will but?...this brings me back full circle too...
That's a good conclusion and why all that math is really only informative for you.Its a subjective evaluation being forced into an objective one.
That's not an insult.You obviously enjoy it and anyone reading it as a subjective comparison should enjoy it.The objective guys are viewing it scientifically and read it and see it as flawed.
Its all good.
I'm in between.Trained in science but only seeking subjectivity in traditional archery.
Jinks, I think I may not have made my point clear when I discussed the Kraken getting short changed.
I was not critiquing your draw length. I am thinking that the Kraken is in reality a 30" draw bow and therefore short changed in the draw length when shot at 28". IOW, it may very well be a 50 or 51 pound bow at 30" and when shot at 28" is not reaching it's design potential.
Looking at the profile pics you posted, the Kraken is not a "D" style bow but an RD bow just as the buff is. One just being a bit more pronounced than the other. At 68" the Kraken just might be a bit long for a 28" draw. An FD curve would tell.
"I am thinking that the Kraken is in reality a 30" draw bow and therefore short changed in the draw length when shot at 28". IOW, it may very well be a 50 or 51 pound bow at 30" and when shot at 28" is not reaching it's design potential."
This Kraken was originally ordered "From Timberpoint" by a fellow with the board handle "PastorSteve"...(heck of a nice guy and a pleasure to deal with BTW)...His name is on the bow and I'm leaving it there cause he just received this $1,270 custom ordered Kraken in June of this year...and the bow is in fact marked...
68"/51#@30"
However?....this "Ordering Info" is straight off Timberpoints website...
********************* Bow length.
Here is my recommendations for the Odyssey III and Kraken:
But nothing is really "Set-In-Stone" especially with custom ordered bow lengths as while some archers may opt for a slightly shorter bow for optimum performance?....others will lean too the longer side because they prefer a smoother draw with a stack-free soft back end to pull through...where recently I've decided "I'm The Latter"...I like long and smooth especially when it comes to Longbows.
Conversely?...My Buffalo Magnum is a 17" risered 66" long bow that according to Big Jim?...is optimized for...and pulls smooth out too a 32" Length of Draw...and I test shot two other Buffalo TD's while there at TBOF Fall Rendezvous....one a 60"/38# and the other a 62"/43# but even knowing what I knew?...this 66"er was sold before the string ever made it too my lips on the first test draw...feeling like if I looked up the word "Smooth" is websters?...a picture of this bow would be beside it...it felt that good.
That's when Big Jim also let me know that...
A: It's not "just a buffalo"...it's a "Buffalo Magnum TD"...with the major difference being it's window is cut past center...which I feel also adds a bit more punch too stiffer spined arrows where I'm also finding?...the heavier the better.
RE: "R/D on the Kraken at Un-strung/Static"
Where I might also relay too you that there is no "competition minded" D-Longbow that I know of that doesn't have as much R/D in it's static profile as the Bowyers of such can possibly incorporate into it's design yet still hit a "D When Strung" Profile...This holds true for numerous brands including the Fox Triple Crown and 21st Century lines of D (when strung) Longbows...where the only ones that don't are the ASL/HH type profile Longbows that are basically dead straight in an un-strung/static condition.
Whatever the case?...The Buffalo Magnum is quickly gaining favor with me as my "Go To" bow...where I never dreamed 525gr/13+GPP arrows moving at 152fps would hold my attention let alone captivate me the way it has...there's just something I find very relaxing about a slow moving, heavy arrow displaying lots of air time with a flight quality that appears rock solid stable..I'm loving it! :)
Maybe if you round up a volunteer to shoot t the kraken at it's designed draw length and weight the unexpected differences would disappear. IOW, a 66" kraken shot at 28" and 46# would outperform the 68" kraken shot at the same weight and draw length.
I certainly agree with your selection of a bow that when shot a bit under design draw does so smoothly and effortlessly. The bow I shoot the most and am hunting with this year is an ASL that draws a straight line FD curve out to 31". Never a bump In the road
Im sure you will find that both the kraken and the buffalo will "perform "better if drawn further...I can't speak for the kraken personally as I'm not that familiar with it but the buff should earn it's stripes around 31 -32"s I have a true 32" draw and choose the 64" buffalo. Just always liked them a bit shorter. I like to shoot 10g pp arrows cause I do. They are quick and quiet. How quick? ..don't care too much. how quiet? D@m quiet. And they better look good doing it cause they are going to be in a lot of pictures with some really beautiful animals. ..and a lot of ugly guys ;) BigJim
Big Jim...no doubt we'd better performance when drawn further back...I also have no doubt that I personally would be seeing higher velocities with a shorter version drawn closer too a stack point but?...I wouldn't trade this bow for that one...simply because there's just so much more than "Just Speed" for me as these days?...I rate a bow based on..."The Total Package"...where I find that if a bow "Feels Tense" to me?...so do I...and I prefer "Relaxed".
I've been "Chasing Speed" for awhile now...(just as a "personal challenge" sort of deal)...and?...just to see what differences things like riser mass and length along with different limb lengths and big hook recurve profiles got me where for me?...the answer was..."Not Much"...seems there's a minus for every plus and a plus for every minus and no free lunch in between...okay...maybe a little snack here and there but nothing to write home about. LOL!
But I am gaining a fondness for slower, heavier arrows...whether I'm aiming intuitively or consciously?...they offer me smaller gaps and point-on sight pictures at what are my max effective ranges...for foam anyways! LOL!
I also like what seems "A More Predictable Arc of The Arrow" along with how a heavy arrow subdues bow vibes and decibels.
And no ones ever going to tell me that a heavy arrow doesn't pack more punch...for instance?...let's use the old "Power Factor Formula" my Tacdtical race guns were subject too in I.P.S.C. competitions of "Grain X's FPS" and let's take the fastest arrow shot first like so...the 270gr arrow off the Kraken...
270gr X's 203fps = a Power Factor of 54,810
now lets take the slowest arrow shot off the Buffalo Magnum...
525gr X's 152fps = a Power Factor of 79,800
and trust me...I've seen enough steel plates fall and NOT FALL between 230gr .45acp and 115gr 9mm's...so that BufMag is packing a serious punch with those 525gr arrows as compared too..."Light & Fast"
One good thing about me having chrono'ed quite a few bows is it has given me quite the data base to reference where I think you folks might find this next vid quite interesting...it's a 62" Bear TD comprised of an old Green Stripe B riser with Brandon Stahls excellent #2 R.O. Custom Limbs...shooting those very same 525gr arrows over the same chronograph...but?...44#@28"..4#'s more DW than the Buffalo Magnum in a 62" Recurve got me 160fps...only8fps faster than the long, limber far more "Draw Friendly" BufMag and holding 4#s less weight OTF's...
and now?...here's that very same Bear TD with the very same 270gr Ultralights the Kraken spit out at 202-203fps..(albeit the Kraken had 2# more DW but off a 6" longer bow)....interesting huh?
Like I said...No Free Lunch...just little snacks...nothing to write home about. ;)
The big brass ring for me has become more about..."how well the archer melds with their bow"...rather than isolating the bow and obsessing about performance...as the bow and the archer must preform well...
Longcruise: Yep...and in our chase of a few more FPS with shorter bows?...we tend to lose sight of some very important other traits which we compromise for such...thing's like...
Stability at Full Draw: where we don't see high wire walker's using short balance poles...same deal with why long longbows are more settled at full draw and also?...
Greater Inherent Accuracy: due to the limb tips of a long longbow not having to travel nearly as far a distance as the limb tips of a short longbow at-the-shot.
Longcruise: It's just plaine fact that limb tips on a shorter AMO bow need to move a greater distance to hit any particular DL.
To exaggerate?...Picture a 20' AMO bow...now....if you stood on the roof and drew it too 28"s?...the tips would barely move at all.
The greater the tip travel?...the wider the door opens for limb path deviation the moment you loose the string.
This is why you often times see smaller stature Oly Archers shooting such long recurves...they want the added stability and the decreased limb tip travel.
Seems such exhibits a higher level of "Inherent Accuracy" ;)
I thought you said the bow tested underperformed because it was underdrawn-so underdrawing is practiced by Olympic archers to increase accuracy? A+B=cucumber.Bye.
Just for fun Jinkster, shoot 60 yards and see which arrows that you prefer. At 20 yards 150 fps is great... you may want to shoot split finger with the slow ones!
"Just for fun Jinkster, shoot 60 yards and see which arrows that you prefer. At 20 yards 150 fps is great... you may want to shoot split finger with the slow ones!"
Funny you mention that?...or?...
did you mention that to be funny? LOL!
But what is awfully coincidental?...is reading this latest response as I just came in from a drizzling rain in my backyard where despite the drizzling rain?...I was anxious to see how this Buffalo Magnum gapped out with these 525gr/13+GPP arrows and where I was sort of figuring I'm looking at a 25yd Point-On rig?...this is how things gapped out....
15yds: Top of my calves hair strike-plate..dead money..(1 1/2" above the shelf)
20yds: 1/3rd of the way down from the top of my strike-plate (1" above the shelf)
25yds: Hold 1 shaft diameter under.
30yds: Point-On
"The Carry & Penetration Into The Bales": was impressive...but what was more impressive?...was how quiet this rig shot. :)
Jinks, your picture of the tips of both bows with the quarter for perspective got me thinking. I have several bows that I can easily tape quarters onto for the purpose of laying to it's final rest the idea that heavy tips provide some sort of snap or extra push at the end of the limb travel.
I can post it here or start another topic so as not to run yours into the weeds. Your call.
It will take a while with a few projects that must be done in order to preserve the peace on the home front. :)
You don't need my permission Brother!...I hate being the only one trying stupid chit to prove out questionable theories! LOL!
But I love doing it! :)
Cause every now and then?...when I leap out of that oh so small box so many others have built for themselves and are content living in?...and I stumble upon something cool in my misadventures?...
It makes all the snafu'ed ideologies worth enduring. :)
One other thought/thing I might mention too you before you go a testing...
The main reason I balked about adding weights too the ends of my Krakens limbs is because they are just so freaking dainty as compared too the Buffalo Magnum...as the Krakens Limbs?...are well tapered at the tips in both width and thickness...(it's how Bowyers hide all that R/D at static)...and it was in that that I envisioned why the Kraken was so fast with lighter arrow weights and so sensitive to increased arrow weights...as I questioned...
"Are the Krakens limb tips 'Noodling' when I start nocking up what are obscenely heavy arrows for it's intended purpose?"
Which in turn led me to wondering if it's the large amounts of beef left on the limb tips of the BufMag that allow it to shrug off heavier arrow weights and remain more stable throughout the shot when piling on the heavy metal. (so to speak)
Your call on how or where you'd like to post up your results...I for one encourage such bold out of the box testing and commend those who join in on the fun. ;)
Ok, I've shot this little weighted tip experiment and it will be posted under a new topic just for clarity. It will go under the "shooting" section and will be titled.....ahhhhh... lemme think..... How about just "Tip Weight?".