The conquest which had a steeper limb angle than the MQ1 came out the year before in 97. They claim the thing goes back to the Signature in 96. Personaly when I saw that I thought great, an elegant looking, and forgiving Ultralight. I don't think they pushed it as parallel limb, though it would have had that sort of effect, and they may have been softening up the market, since the first step was getting people to go for allt hat riser. Next year they came out with the ugly looking Conquest, but it was obvious what they were up to, and the bow shot great. I didn't know what they where doing with the Paralimb design when they came out with the MQ1, and the limbs where less parallel.

They saw back and forth. The legacy was Paralimb more than the Icon. Why?

Actualy, though I don't remember people saying it, their earlier ugly Z bows had pretty parallel limbs, but the argument then seemed to be that they needed the angle to deal with how short they were, not recoil. Then if you jump back to Browning bows of the 80s, they had a more parallel limb than most, being like the Zs in shape, and so forth.