This is somewhat of an offshoot of Kevin’s “tech experience” thread.

As most of you know, I’m a gearhead…a tech-head, whatever you want to call me (that the naughty language filter will allow). Over the years I’ve tried to learn and absorb as much about the technical” aspects of bow, arrow, & accessory design as I could. I think that’s it’s very valuable information in that it allows us to make informed choices instead of being at the mercy of the large percentage of incompetent Archery Shops, Manufacturers claims, or our “buddies” who have been shooting for 6 months.

But as I get older, I wonder just how much of this technical info, in the grand scheme of things, is of major importance. Not that it’s unimportant, but just that it’s not as important as we may feel..especially when it comes down to hunting, or the casual target shooter (i.e. the vast majority of archers in this country)

There are many subjects where the Archery “tech” community is divided mostly based on Manufacturers who’ve draw a line in the sand as to what is “best”: importance of Nock Travel, Single vs. Dual vs. Hybrid, Dropaway vs. launcher vs. Whisker Biscuit, Molded vs. Laminated limbs, Extruded vs. 100% machined risers, plastic vs. metal limb pivots, Roller guards vs. standard cable guards, etc, etc., ad nauseum….

I certainly have my own thoughts on these things based on what I have learned from the technical testing, but oftentimes I find for all the technical proof of why something is or isn’t better, my practical shooting & shop experience shows just the opposite or not enough proof to make any absolute conclusions one way or the other.

e.g.

Nock Travel: While certainly some bows exhibit poor nock travel, and should be harder to tune due to it, Some of my most accurate, easy tuning bows, showed the worst nock travel :shrug:

Limbs: Again like nock travel issues, I’ve had the absolute most expensive limbs on the market, and the least expensive…yet I have not been able to draw any conclusions one way or another over which is truly “better” when it comes down to putting that arrow where I want it. At least I could not single it out to the limbs themselves…

Hybrids/Singles/Duals: Theoretically the hybrids and duals should be more accurate and/or more forgiving, but again my practical experience shows that I shoot more consistently and comfortably with the single-cam design, though it took me awhile to warm up to them (or perhaps, the improvements made in the past 4 years have brought them up to the same level or better of previous cam technology)

Build Tolerances: Like limbs, I’ve had some bows that were absolutely pristine for tolerances..limb pockets, limbs, axles, machining, etc, etc…Yet some of the best shooting bows I’ve owned had horrible build tolerances (and some had very good or pristine tolerances too)

I think only in arrow shafting have I personally been able to draw any solid conclusions that proves the technical “theory”.

Certainly some leeway will have to be given to the technical side of things when we include some of the more “extreme” areas of our sport..Olympic level shooting, any other LONG distance event, etc…where the difference between winning and losing can indeed come down to a technical issue…(yet still often comes down to the jerk jerking on the string)

However, while I think all the technical info is excellent for education,knowledge and for discerning from one end of the quality spectrum to the opposite (i.e, from $hit to shine-ola); assuming a decent piece of equipment, what it all boils down to is the individual…fitting that decent piece of equipment to that individual, and achieving our own “personal tight tolerances” in tuning our form and the bow itself (and using a quality set of arrows ).

Not to ruffle any feathers here (honest), but I'm starting to wonder if subjective tests like the ones we’ve heard about on the BowFight (errr..BowSite), Hunters Friend, or in Outdoor Life/F&S magazines are ultimately the “best” tests there are: meaning that “practical experience” is more important than the “theory” (I’m not concerned with what name is on the limbs, I mean the test itself). The “tech” reports can show us that Bow X’s nock travel and limb to pocket finish or whatever is clearly superior to Bow Z….but if Bow X does not “fit” the archer and he shoots it poorly or at the least not as well,, then does it really matter what the technical tests prove/disprove?


OK Class, discuss..and no flaming!