RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

Carbon Express already puts a coating on their arrows. Called Buff Tuff, I have no idea what it is made of, anybody know?

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

My point exactly.

Did any of you guys read that article about the "Frictionless Carbon" from Argonne? Really awesome stuff. Definitely some utility in arrow-building. Says the stuff is ultra thin and ultra tough.

Rybo - I don't think it would really help much on the flight end (like you said, probably only a fraction of a percent), but the biggest reward would be that you wouldn't rip your shoulder out of socket while trying to wrench a Gold Tip out of a McKenzie target.

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

I don't know, but I'm afraid to Google it on a government computer.

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

As I am sure you remember from your fluid dynamics and aerodynamics classes:eek: A smooth surface only has less drag in a laminar flow. Once the flow goes turbulent, like in the speeds of the flight of an arrow, then you actually have less friction on a rough surface. That is why a golf ball is dimpled, the olympic swimmers have dimped suits, the Tour de France guys where dimpled suits, etc. Now as far as arrow removal from a target goes, sure it would work, but I don't see arrows selling for $25 a piece because they slide out of a target easily.

Edit: I would think the dimples would bounce on the rest and be awfully tough to get off the bow correctly, at least with a prong rest like mine.

Atlas, don't worry about ingesting slivers of Teflon, it is only toxic in a gas form. Now, it does become a gas at a relatively low temperature, so if you are cooking on it you do not want the pan to get too hot. On the plus side, you cannot digest it as a solid so it will just slide right through you.

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

Molybdenum Disulfide (MoS2) or Tungsten Disulfide (WS2) might be better alternatives to Teflon as either would add strength and not chip/peel/flake. But it could be very cost prohibited.

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

But, this isn't a golf ball - or something with a lot of texture that's gonna generate much turbulence (like a road biker or a human swimmer).

The flow will probably be relatively laminar, right? The leading edge (tip) might cause a little turbulence, but after that, we're looking at a fairly laminar flow until it the molecules hit the fletchings, and are disrupted. This is a flying column with an aerodynamic tip, not something that is going to disrupt the airflow and create turbulence around the shaft.

The real turbulence doesn't occur until the flow of air reaches the fletchings.

I'd argue that the airpassing over an arrow in flight is moresimilar toair moving through a straight pipe than it is akin to a turbulent disturbance around the leading edge ofa flying golfball.

Also: People are willing to pay $12 a high-end carbon arrow right now (without adding the price of a head). They would pay more if the added benefit met the price. Besides, I don't think it would cost $25 an arrow to coat them. They sell teflon-coated generic pans at the Dollar Tree. It can't be that expensive - especially under an economy of scale.

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

quicksilver, there is one easy way to determine if it is tubulent or not... do the calculation. My guess is that it would be after just a few inches down the arrow shaft, but I do not know for sure and I have not done any calculating. Let me know how it comes out. I am interestedin this one.

As far as cost goes, I don't know what it would cost I just threw a number out there.The problems with using Teflon have already been brought up. It will not last on the arrow and so in short order it becomes a regular carfbon arrow. Either way, it would be expensive and it would take a ton of upfront capital and years of manufacturing to develop your economies of scale. Even after which, it would still be a major production cost increase over normal carbon arrows. I will say that for sure I would not pay even an extra 15% per arrow just do it pulls out of the target easier.

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

Huntingson - reread my initial post.We're not talking about Teflon. I'm just toying with the idea of a low-friction coating. Not teflon specifically. I just mentioned teflon, b/c most people are familiar with it.

I'll take Hazcon's word for it that there are other substances (like MoS2 & WS2) that might perform more amicably.

I'd agree though - most people wouldn't pay extra tobuy a specially coated arrow just b/c it looked prettier or was easy to pull from the targets. . . and surely no company would spend all that money researching a way to coat an arrow with a product that really wouldn't make all that much difference... Oh, wait.. they already do. [X(]

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

Hey! That looks really familiar! Yep, they're mine. See, I told you there'd always be someone who would buy it. I just didn't think I was talking about myself.:D

RE: Huntingnet Mythbusters - improving the carbon arrow
 

Don't sweat it Chief, I have the same ones.I even paid $10 more for the camo coating, and all it did was make the arrow heavier and slow it down. We're suckers, we admit it.[>:]