I am trying to short cut my search for an arrow that matches my new bow. Bow is a 60" two piece take down long bow, 55# @ 26" draw; using a 27" shaft. I tuned-in an Easton 500 carbon shaft with 125 gr head. Problem is that total arrow weight is around 350+ gr and I want at least 550 gr. Any suggestions as to what shaft/head combination that may be viable? As mentioned above I am trying to shortlist options rather than broad trial and error approach.

Rick

Try a 400 spine Gold Tip Traditional - 9.3 gpi - with 100 grain brass insert, 125 grain tip, 9 grain nock, 9 grain feathers. You do not need to keep your arrow at 1" over your draw length. Start with arrow shaft at 32 inches and work slowly your way dawn from there until the arrow tunes for your bow. Cut 1/8 inch at a time. You might have to increase tip weight so make sure you have 150, 175, 200, 225 tips available. Use hot glue to set the insert which will allow you easy removal before cutting. Use a shaft without feathers for tuning. If a little weak it is OK as the feathers will stiffen the dynamic spine when added. Take your time and make notes of arrow specs when done this way you will not have to go through all the work next time for the same bow. Enjoy the process. Good luck.

I agree with SixLomaz, but would add try the same thing with your 500s too

Use a 28" 2018 aluminum and you'll have the weight you need. One of the drawbacks of carbon is that light mass. Rather than add this or that to make it work, a 2018 will be the right spine and you will have the weight without fuss.

My money is on George for this one. Maybe a 2016, depending on your release.

The only thing not to like about alumalogs is the stuff you hit when you miss!

Thanks guys. I will start with George's idea and see where that leads me. Local bow shop will sell me a couple 2018's. I will let you know how it works out.

Rick

.400 Easton Axis would work. Put in a 100 grain brass insert and whatever weight adaptor (50-75,100 or 125 grains), plus your head to achieve the arrow weight you want.

Cut to 28 inches and fitted with a 100 grain brass insert, 50 grain aluminum adaptor and 125 grain head, you should be very close to 550 grains, with excellent FOC to boot. Of course, you can put in lighter inserts and use heavier adaptors. Choices are just about limitless.

I'm not a fan of letting the arrows long, though that's certainly one way to tune. For a lot of reasons, I don't want my arrows any longer than they need to be, about 1-inch longer than my draw length. I cut them to that length and tune with front end weight and adjustments to the side plate, if necessary. Of course, I'd want them as long as possible to reduce the gaps if I were a gap shooter.

Good luck.

You know I'm confused about long arrows needed for gaps. The best barebow shooter I knew, and he was dang good...averaged over 500 on the field round new faces, used a clicker and pulled the arrows through it. Rod Hoover was an incredible shot and his arrows were just long enough to clear the clicker on his shelf at full draw. He wasn't a string walker and shot split finger, and was a gapper.

Is it just easier to learn gapping with those long arrows? Enlighten me...I was never patient enough to learn a system.

George, I think it has to do with were you gap. I gap closer to the bow window, so mine doesn't change due to arrow length.

Rick, I'd buy a bunch of different point wieghts. Put a 300 grain point on the arrows you have before you spend money on another set. Your draw is short enough to make a .500 pretty stiff. Tune with impacts and you might be surprised.

You can spend all that extra money in your pocket on buying me a beer!!! LoL.

Bowmania

My arrow choice would be 1820's rather than 2018's (cause I like the small diameter and thick wall) but the end result would be the same as what George suggested.

I like the 2018’s.

George gapping off the tip the longer the arrow the smaller the gap will be the closer point on. For most it is just easier to judge /estimate smaller distances of the gaps.

Squire, the only way with light weight carbons is to load up the front end which requires a stiffer spine. A heavier shaft/aluminium with a thicker wall makes it a lot easier.>>>----> Ken

For me, at least, tighter gaps are more accurate and repeatable. In fact, I shoot best w no gap--- point on through string walking. Im not looking for " the easy way". I have put in a ton of time shooting split and 3 under--- unfortunately I always got to a plateau that fell short of where i wanted to be. I am amazed at people who are able to be very accurate shooting instinctively. I guess im wired differently--- never could make a basket either.

2 bears, what you describe is probably the most logical, and by far the quickest way for people shooting recurves or longbows to develop respectable accuracy quickly.

Thanks guys, that's something I never delved into.

Welcome George. If i could shoot like you do, i wouldn't mess with gapping either. Always enjoy your videos!

I limit my shooting when hunting to 25 yards and do not aim or gap inside that distance. I shoot few recurve and longbow models in 45# to 50# range that tune excellent with 32" Gold Tip Traditional XT with 5" feathers, 100 grain brass insert and 125 to 150 grain tips / BH.

Other bows I have, same draw weight range, require shorter shafts in order to tune in, and I have few arrow sets cut in at 29.75" to 30.5" range.

It is best to start with an uncut featherless shaft and go down slow from there. With every cut test different tip / insert weight combinations until the right solution reveals itself like magic. It is a lot of work and requires patience and dedication. The reward is satisfying as you watch a bare shaft sail straight towards the target shot after shot.

400 spine Gold Tip Trad XT shafts. Few bows require 500 spine, and one actually shoots straight only with 340 spine. You have to test in order to transfer the most energy and keep it into the arrow.

Setting the traditional bow brace height

The following is a method for letting the bow tell where to set brace height:

1. Set a horizontal line on your target using tape.

2. Set the brace height to the lowest value suggested by the manufacturer.

3. Shoot a group with field points at the horizontal line from same distance; 10 to 15 yards. NOTE: Tip of the arrow at full draw is aimed at the horizontal line.

4. Measure and record the group's impact above that horizontal line.

5. Add five twists to the string; shoot another group, and repeat, each time recording both the new brace height and the measurement of the resulting target impact, working towards the brace height upper limit of the manufacturer's recommendation if there is one.

6. Initially the impact will rise steadily above the horizontal line but then suddenly starts to drop.

7. Go back to the recorded brace height which has the highest impact measurement above the horizontal line and set the brace height to that recorded measurement. That should be where the bow was transferring the greatest amount of energy to the arrow. It should also be the quietest with the least felt hand shock as the byproducts of wasted energy are usually noise and vibration.

George, Yep, longer arrows make gapping easier. This is very true for the longer distances, as in field archery. I believe most field archery champions select an arrow length that will give them a point-on range of around 50 to 60 yards. Any less and when you elevate enough to reach 65,70 and 80 yards your bow hand blocks your line of sight. This way gap aiming is very convenient and accurate at from about 45 to 60 yards, and useable to 80.

The downside of that is that gaps are so large as to not be useful at shorter distances. So at hunting distances your have to aim some other way, most likely instinctive/intuitive or whatever you choose to call it. My gap at 20 yards is about 5 feet so to aim off the point it would be way down in the dirt. No good.

So how do I aim at 20 yards? Actually, I'm not sure. I don't know how I aim. There is something about pointing the arrow (we all learnt how to point a finger by first grade) and maybe something about visualizing the trajectory rising and then falling into target center. It is much like when I played third base in city league softball. On ground balls I would look at the first baseman's chest and make the firm intention to throw there. No aiming, just yearning. The subconscious mind has a great capacity for achieving goals.

In archery I talk silently to my subconscious, telling it to hit plumb center, dead solid perfect, riiiight theeere! And it often does. Can this be really accurate at 20 yards? You bet. I won about 10 indoor California state indoor championships and various other championships that way with my longbow and wooden arrows. I could have won more but my trophy room got full so I gave up competition.

Ultimately it may be a matter of firm intention and strong will. 80 per cent of archery is 90 per cent mental. I won because I so deeply wanted to. I won the longbow marked 3D nationals to 101 yards at the age of 68.

Aiming is over-rated. There is no use focusing on aiming if you cannot execute the shot well enough to hit what your are aiming at. - lbg

Axis are heavy due to wall thickness, which also makes them very tough. I've yet to bust one, so must not have been trying (GT Trads are toast by comparison).

My full length skinny Axis Trad 600s weigh 426 with standard full length brass inserts and 125gr points so should be easy to get over 500 with Axis 400s and heavier points.

If youre buying a couple aluminums to try and are concerned about heavy weight, grab a couple nasp (1820)arrow shafts while youre @ it. They make a 400 grain 9/32 arrow with ease. I think cut to 27" and 125 grain point i had a 435 grain arrow, if memory serves me right. A dz shafts is $35ish and they are tough as nails. Wish i had 1 to weigh to refresh my memory, but i traded all mine off as i dropped poundage and could no longer use them. Plus they come in about any color you want. Throw inserts in them, hell...add .234 cx pin nock adapters to them and theyre damned near indestructible. Ask Dao on here how he likes his.

Carbon Express 150's are about 500 spine and are 10.1 GPI. Great and tough hunting shaft if you want to go with a carbon shaft.

The 1820 may work but you don't have a lot of options for bushings, and the narrow diameter may be borderline for his weight...even at a 28" arrow. The 2018 is identical...nearly...in grains per inch and can be bought in the T-9 hardness which makes it more durable. Unless you are shooting railroad cars or solid rock, they will last a long time; matter of fact, you will likely lose more than you bend with the good quality of aluminum alloy used today.

For me, aluminum is the way to go since it has inherent mass and is so easy to spine to several weights without all the gozintos you need with carbons. Not dismissing carbons as a good choice, just prefer the simplicity of aluminum makeup...thick walls, inherent mass and ease of tuning.

I agree george. I just wanted to piggy back on my last statement. The 1820 will accept a g or f nock as is. Or remove the nock bushing and you can use .234 cx precision nocks and #4 cx inserts, which actually fit better than the available 1820 inserts. So, 2018 or 1820...your choice in aluminum. 1 other thing to think about is if you prefer nock swedges, or insertable nocks.

Well thats' a lot of information to digest. My Easton 500 Carbons at 27" drawn to 26" fly great with 125 gr upfront (bare shaft). As I said in my original post my concern is arrow weight. As George suggested I picked up a couple 2018's,unfletched this morning but I haven't had a chance to try them yet. I have point weights in my kit from 75 gr to 250 gr so I have enough options to try. However I noted when I picked up the 2018's they are rated 55-60#. I tried Douglas Fir rated at 65-70# in that same 55# bow and they shot nock left (bare shaft) even with a 100 gr insert. I have been shooting a good number of years and I don't think my release is too bad. In any case I will report back this evening when I have a go with the 2018's.

Thanks for all the great input.

Rick

2018's are actually 68lb. spine. 2016 is 59lbs.. The reason that you can many times get a way with 2018's is the centershot of the bow, and the forgiveness of aluminum.

Well I tried the 2018's 28" bare shaft in my 55# long bow and they are way under spined for that bow, I started of with a 100 gr field point and finished with a 75 gr point still way too weak. To salvage the 15 bucks I spent on the two 2018s I am gonna cut one down to 27" and see what that does for me. Moose season getting close and I wanted to use this long bow but looks like I may have to go back to old reliable BW PSAV.

Thanks for all your suggestions.

Rick

With his stated parameter of 27" bop, which I totally agree with, like stated, the 2018 will be too stiff. If you add enough point weight, it wi be too heavy. My 27" bop 1918s with 160 grain Grizzly heads come in at 538 grains with one piece adaptors. My 55 27" bop Surewood firs with 160 grain heads come in at 538 to 545 grains. You may need to be a bit flexible on the total arrow weight. Bare shafting 27" bop shafts may lead you a lot of places other where you want to go. I would suggest 55 doug firs, fletched, to try. 65-70 at 27" bop would be over spined for most bows.

You need to use a stiffer spine and longer arrow. I use full length axis trad 340s with 125 grain points with a 54@28 recurve.

Buy an arrow straightener if you go with aluminum, Carbon is either straight or broke.

Aluminum is cheap, ($60 a dozen for shafts), and better straightness and tolerance than carbon costing twice as much. Glancing shots are you best chance to bend aluminums, But such shots usually break carbons for me.

The best nock for 1820's are the Deep Six...shorter and stronger than any others.

I used threaded inserts I found online for my 1820's. It's a tough arrow.

I am surprised a 2018 cut to 28" from a 55# @26" bow was underspined with a 100 grain head...does not make sense.

Pdiddly, my guess the shaft isn't under spined unless it is considerably past center. Something else at play there.

Why use a stiffer spine and longer arrow if you want an arrow that's a particular length? Just buy the spine that's right for the length.

I like skinny arrows because better aerodynamics equals flatter trajectory and (maybe) less twig/wind sensitivity. Skinny equals tougher at same spine because of thicker walls. There are several carbon alternatives, one of which is Easton Axis. Another is Victory TKO. Think GT isn't. Full length, aim, gap-stinctive. Would be totally different if I was a tree sitter rather than ethafoamer/wannabe elker.

Thanks again for all the input. It appears the majority feels the 2018's should be maybe over-spined although that is not the result I am getting. The Bow Shop is going to cut my 2018 down from 28" to 27", that's the length I like, and it should stiffen it a little bit. If that don't work better then I will try building out the side plate a little to see how that works. Just maybe the nock end is whacking the side plate and giving a false weak spined result.

Rick

Squire....you need to build out the sideplate before you cut the arrows.

You also need to be shooting the arrows at a vertical line on your target to determine spine. If the arrows impact right, they are weak, if they impact left they are stiff. And it doesn't matter at all which way the nocks are leaning.

The vast majority of shooter aren't consistent enough to be able to determine proper spine by reading nock kick.

It's all about impacts.

Right now, you are in the midst of a classic case of chasing spine. If you continue down this path, it's going to get worse.

Overspined can give you a false weak reading - too stiff the back of the arrow hits the riser and kicks out giving a weak reading.

If you have already registered, please

sign in now

For new registrations

Click Here