HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Since we have been thinking a little bit about bow speeds - check this out.

Think: an average ATA bow, but only a 3-4" brace height, using 2 STS stoppers to keep the string over-travel from slamming your wrist. Cables pulled to the side via roller guard.

By stepping down from a traditional 7" brace height, you'd be adding another 3-4" to the effective draw, and a MUCH longer force-draw curve. Conventional thinking says that by cutting out that much brace height, and replacing it with effective draw length, you could add 30+ feet per second, right?

The riser would just reach 3-4 more inches forward, pulling the strings and cables that much closer to the grip.

I guess, looking at my 5 minute redneckcrude drawing, it's a little off, and the strings/cable would be fed through a roller guard that would most likely be offset right at the grip itself. (Closer to the riser than it actually appears in the picture). But that's me nitpicking.

Anyway, why wouldn't it work?

Really, there are enough "crutches" available to make up for a bad shooter (string loop, dropaway, etc..), that something like this might be "shootable." I mean, there are newbs out there as we speak shooting lights-out with 6" bh X-forces.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Man dude, you would be talking more the 30 fps I believe....Prolly more like 50.......I'm no engineer though......

I would think you have to build it with some sort of shoot through system, I feel like if you used a roller cable gaurd you might be putting an awefull lot of torque on the system.....

Wouldn't be the most forgiving bow in the world, but it just may be the fastest...

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Just think of all the money you could have made if you only had applied for the patent before you posted the pic on the internet.:D

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

7" is only 'traditional' if you haven't been around bows longer than 4-5 years. Brace heights just came back UP to 7" fairly recently. Many used to be in the 5" range to squeeze out a little more IBO speed. Problem was those bows were so critical of shooting errors that most people couldn't shoot them worth a darn. So, low brace bows failed in the market place and manufacturers went back to making bows that were a little slower but reasonably easy to shoot well.

Not to mention that bows braced that low are practically impossible to shoot while wearing cold weather gear.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

The problem with a bow with that short of a brace height is that it becomes very unstable and takes a long time to settle in the hand when you pulol to full draw.

The bows pivot point is at the grip. The string is only 3 inches rear of the grip and the limbs are attached 9 inches in front of the grip.

Basically the more reflexed the riser the more the bow wants to turn around backwards as you pull the string.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

BB - I was thinking about that - there is a point where the bow will actually try to flip backwards. Not sure where that point is, though. I'd think as long as the handle isn't BEHIND the cams, it won't try to flip, b/c the contact point (the cam) is always (on the axis) between the handle and the nockpoint.

Art - while they did try short bh bows, they weren't shooting them with string loops, dropaways and STS's to keep the strings off their hands. Also, they were built using inferior materials and not many people really knew how to shoot with a consistent form either. As you know, I'm sure, there were a lot of ideas out there that floundered once, then came back to the forefront later (dropaway rests, STS's, cable rollers, etc..). A lot of guys ruined a lot of watches on those old PSE Mach bows. That story might have ended differently, if they had a dampener installed, blocking the string from overtraveling forward and stinging them.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

isnt there already a bow similar to that its like really tiny?? i cant seem to find it right now.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

here it is I think.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Oh, please, quicksilver, keep telling me how we used to do things. It's SO entertaining. :D

Yes, even way back at the turn of the new millenium :eek:, we were using string loops and releases. We certainly did know how to shoot with consistent form. The manufacturers were using exactly the same materials then as they are now. NOTHING has changed in the short time since except the move to longer risers and shorter parallel limbs.

And parallel limb technology, that's not new, if you'll go back and take a look at the old Rigid compound from the 70's. I'll even post up a pic of it for you. Naturally, this was long before they figured out the stuff about reflexing the riser to shorten brace height, but here you had a 34" axle to axle bow with a machined aluminum riser.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Sorry Artie - most older limbs were compression molded, and now they're glass laminates, built using a whole different subset of components. Much more adept at handling repetitive flex. If you don't believe me, I have a 250 grain arrow that I'll let you borrow to shoot out of your maxed out1992 PSE. We'll see how it handles that. Bring your trash bag, your hockey helmet,and your warranty card. :D But you knew that anyway.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Sorry back at ya, quickie, but you need to air out your britches. They've been blown plumb FULL of smoke. [8D]

You might be interested to know that those super duper limbs are the exact same laminate construction as Hoyt and other manufacturers started using back in the late 80's in their mid price range bows. Barnsdale has been making those limbs for a long, long time and they are not exclusive to your bow's manufacturer.

I'm reasonably sure the riser those limbs are mounted on is the same 7075 aluminum alloy that all other manufacturers use for their machined riser bows... and have been using since PSE came out with that new fangled machined riser of theirs back in '86.

And if you think I'm going to try and shoot a 250 grain arrow from a 65 pound bow at 33" draw, you ARE effin' crazy. LOL! Don't you find it mildly interesting that your fave-of-the-moment manufacturer won't even build a bow in my draw length under that warranty?

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Wis Bow,

Do you own that bow?

Tom

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Sorry Artie - It's 6061 aluminum that all the companies are using...

...and while the lamination process is still basically the same (stack, glue, stack, glue), the components are completely different than they were, even 10 years ago.

Yeah, same basic idea - stack, glue, stack, glue - however, the curing processes, the epoxies, the fibrous materials - leagues ahead of where they were even 10 years ago. No contest. Maybe it's not as noticeable on bows, b/c you're just reflexing it uniformly every time you shoot, but go ski downhill on a pair of 1983 K2's, then try a set of 07's, and come back tell me it's the same thing.

I know how much it pains you to admit it, but there have been technological advances inboth materials and assembly processesover the past 20 years.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

I think we should change the title of this post to "The Quicksilver and Arthur P Debate"

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Throw a WB on the bow and i'll buy it[:-]:D

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Really? Mathews uses 7075. I know Hoyt uses 7075 for at least some of their bows. I figured that other companies must use the same materials, since the prices aren't that different. Hmmm... Since 7075 transmits vibration a bit better, maybe other companies' bows wouldn't be shootable with anything other than 6061. Must be why there are so many bent risers.

Anyway, you're right. There have been technological advances over the past 20 years. But the advances in materials are not proprietary to any bow company. Your manufacturer doesn't have anything the other companies don't have... except a really wild way of trying to claw their way back into some market share.

There ya go! Good idea.;)

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Can't say that I know all that much about aluminum, but isn't 7075 one of the highest strength aluminum alloys available?

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

7075 has roughly twice the tensile strength, shear strength and fatigue strength of 6061. But because it is so strong, it does transmit vibration quite a bit more than 6061.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Not sure who peed in your Geritol this morning Artie, but you're really having a hard time getting over this whole High Country thing. I never even said anything about my bow. Just pointed out that I shoot an arrow that would blow most olderbows to smithereens.

Is it my fault that they put a good limb on it? No. But Is that why I bought it? Yes. Is it my fault where they draw the line on their warranty? No. But was that a reason I bought it? Yes.

From my understanding, 7075 vibrates like a tuning fork, doesn't allow much, if any, flex in the riserand is a dog to machine. I'm not even gonna pretend to be a CNC machining expert, but I did read that somewhere.

Anyway, back on topic - whether or not the idea of a 3" brace height is doable, the idea of using 2 string suppressors (equidistant from the nockpoint) is very doable. I think it makes sense, too. Seems like if you're trying to eliminate vibration, you'd want to mirror the string slap at the bottom with another, similar force at the top.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Fortunately, I AM an expert in machining since I'm an aerospace machinist by trade. 7075 is a dream to machine. It's my favorite metal to work with. 6061 is really soft and kind of gummy and warps (stress relieves) like a sonuvagun if you take a heavy cut on just one side. Just so you'll know.

I'm trying to get across to you that the limbs are no better than you can get on any other bow in it's price range. The riser is no better. The limb pockets are no better. The strings and cables are no better. All the manufacturers have access to exactly the same technology. I just thought I'd take one more stab at trying to keep you from ruining a bow... or yourself.

I'd like to stay and play some more, but, after all this rain we've been having the sun's finally a'shinin' and the birds are chirpin'. I gotta get outside. It's time for me to head out to the range, meet up with my buddies and shoot some arrows.

Did you notice? I changed my signature in your honor. ;)

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

I had a similar idea back in April while sitting the turkey blind. Beauty of this system is that you could use a very short arrow, if you mounted the arrow rest only slightly ahead of the STS. And a very short arrow could be fairly stiff and still be extremely light weight. Which would kick the speed up even more. If that is desired outcome . . . . .

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Artie - I'll have to defer to you on the machining - all I know is that there isn't a bow company out there not using 6061 on their bows, but that's neither here nor there...

Rrrright.:D Okay, maybe I'll give you the limb pockets...

Roskoe - do you mean something just like a long overdraw?

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

Roskoe, only if you used an overdraw and that would only add to the inaccuracies of a bow designed like this. This design is already highly unstable in the hand with out the use of an overdraw.

An arrow rest mounted three inchesback would only decrease thearrow lengthby about 2 inches. Which in todays carbon world is only about 10 - 20 grains.

RE: HNI Mythbusters. Am I crazy, or would this work?
 

I'd rather have a bit of vibration then a piece of aluminum in the forhead.:D;):) ---Not that I plan on using either....