OHbowhntr

Presenting or Mis-presenting???? You certainly presented that info with a very biased twist to it. Comparing APPLES to APPLES, the BT 101st vs. an X-Force vs. and Elite GTO would be more "comparable." Those bows at 60# are all capable of comparable energy outputs to the lower class of bow you mention at 70#, that is true, but everything comes at a price. For a "relative" speed-bow, I believe the 101st is the bow that had the MOST to offer out of 2008's offerings because of the longer BH, and longer A-to-A along with the nice solid wall it had. I did draw a little more aggressive than say a BLACK Ice, but it's all in what a particular bowhunter wants. the 70# Black Ice and 70# Alpha Max I shot both drew like a 60# 101st or a 60# Trykon, only there was about the same or more energy stored in their draws.

mfd1027

I'm having trouble understanding your pt. here. If your trying to say that a 60 lb.bow with a high efficiency rating like an X force can possibly outperform a less efficient bow even if it has a 70 lb. rating I don't think you'll get much argument here. Now, if your saying that there's a possibility of a 60 lb. bow being more efficient than a 70 lb. bow,well, that just won't hold water. You'd have to compare apples to apples like a 60 lb. X Force to a 70 lb. X Force. Maybe it's the title of the topic "60 vs 70...no diff. in power" that's messing me up.

Dan

MeanV2

Not sure why you think the 101st had the MOST to offer? I had both the 101st and the 82nd and in my hands the 82nd was just as Accurate, Quieter, and an easy 10fps faster. I guess that's why the 101st didn't stay at my house too long

I'm guessing because the 101st was dropped in 09 and the 82nd made a return appearance, that I wasn't the only one who had that type of experience with the 2.

Dan

OHbowhntr

Just my observation Dan, opinions may vary, I never shot an 82nd, but I did shoot a 101st, both seemed pretty comparable I thought, and I heard quite a few guys who liked the 101st a little better as well, but that's another thread all in it's own.

MeanV2

I'd guess most guys that preferred the 101st over the 82nd only shot the 82ndfor a short time or Never shot the 82nd at all. I shot boththe 101st & the 82ndfor about 6 weeks.They weresetup exactly the same before I was Positive (at least for methatthe 82nd was a better Bow)

I was one that was very leary of the 82nd in the beginning by looking at specs alone. I can guarantee you it shot like No other Speed bow with a 6 1/8" BH that I've ever shot.

I was Not surprised when BowTech brought back the 82nd, but dropped the 101st. Like you said opinions vary, but I would suggest to anyone that theyspend a little time with both bows in hand before forming a rigid opinion.

I know it changed my mind!

Dan

OHbowhntr

Most of us don't have near that opportunity like you do though Dan, I suppose that's probably where some of the "liked the 101st better" reports came from.

dogboy900

I think the whole point of this thread was that in some places you have a minimum draw weight requirement to hunt. This is not as relevant as it might have been years ago. Many bows now have so much more kinetic energy at lower than the minimum legal hunting draw weight would have had at the time the laws were enacted.

In most places in Africa the minimum draw weight for hunting dangerous game is 80lb and has been for a long time. This 80lb draw weight covers both compound and traditional archery equipment. The difference in speed and kinetic energy is huge!

im ocd

Thank you.

I'm not talking draw cycle, brace height, or grip. This is simply a comparison of a high performing bow pulling 60 LB versus average 70 LB models. I'm not talking X Force only, it's not about brand, could be Bowtech, Mathews, High Country, APA..... pick one with an IBO of 340-345 and compare to a different bow with an IBO of 310-315 and you will get the same difference.The entire point is people should not say you need to pull __ LB for ____ animal. Bows vary greatly in power output and it makes more sense to say you need 35 LB of KE / .38 momentum for whitetails than you need to pull 40 Lb for deer. One 40# bow could produce 30# of KE while another delivers 40# .... same for 50#, 60#

TEmbry

Like I said, you are still wrong on how big the difference is. My Hoyt Vectrix IBO's 316, and my setup at 29" 70# is cranking right over 80ft/lbs of KE. Your 340-350 IBO XForce at 58#s is putting out 70ft/lbs. The slower, more forgiving, more comfortable bow with a bigger BH will likely be as easy to pull as the speed demon, even with the 10# limb difference. It's not as huge as you are making it out to be.

That said, both are ample KE to blow through nearly any animal found on this planet, bar a few bigger dangerous game.

I'm dropping in draw weight on my next bow as well, but I won't find it necessary to switch to a screamer to compensate the difference.

im ocd

How so?

Bowhunting World Magazine tested the bows, not me. I listed the speeds exactly as published and supplemented the KE / momentum numbers. I chronographed my bow and weighed the arrows on a grain scale. The performance of my bow matches the data chart given on the PSE site.

I am comparing "apples to apples" in regard to draw length and arrow weight.

I've been very specific about the difference in brace height and how I'm not comparing the draw cycle, which is a subjective preference.

I am not wrong on the performancedifference, I'm exact.