Muzzy Rest causing additional torque?

[Olink]

Last night I started preparing to install a Muzzy ZE on my new Ultratec Cam & 1/2. The first thing I did was put on the Muzzy cable slide so I could mark the start and end position of the slide on the cable guard. Anyhow, I noticed that the Muzzy slide holds the cables MUCH closer to the cable guard than the Hoyt slide does. This really seems to be adding a lot more torque to the system. Has anyone else noticed this? Has anyone seen any problems from this or can it potentially cause any problems?

P.S. I have the Muzzy adapter plate for the Hoyt bows, but the Hoyt adapter plate is irrelevant to the situation.

[Bees]

I have Muzzy Zero Effect rests on two of my tech bows. I used the adapter plates from Muzzy. The cables have never been a problem with either bow. They both work great.

[Len in Maryland]

Olink:

I can see your concern; but, you' re going to get this on any drop-away that replaces the slide. I compared the Hoyt cable slide to several other drop-away slides and the ' problem' is worse.

The difference when using the MZE is about .100 (1/10" ). In the scheme of things, while not meeting with the design criteria of Hoyt bows, I wouldn' t think it will show much difference. You can check it by doing a critical tolerance check using both slides.

Also, the difference would be more critical when considering the ATA of the bow. The shorter the ATA, the more critical.

[Olink]

Thanks for the words of encouragement Len. When I first read your post I thought there was no way it was only .1 inch of difference. But on the cable closest to the cable guard, that' s all it was. The cable on the arrow side was about double that, so I suppose thats what caught my eye. However, that cable should be less critical of the increased ' bend' since it is the one that is connected to the yoke. I have been extremely pleased with the Muzzy ZE that is on my Maverick and was hoping that there wouldn' t be a problem with one on my Ultratec.