I just heard from my local proshop that Champion Bow Co. went out of business as of last Thursday.
The info he had (he was a Champion dealer) was that they were sued (and lost) by someone who has a patent on the draw length module that they used on their bows.
He was also told that four other bow companys are in the same situation.

Anyone have any knowlege of this?

Bowfanatic! I just heard the same story last night at work ,I was about to post this very same thread until I read your's .I'm hoping this isn't true since I like the Champion line and they are very reasonably priced. I never heard about any other companies involved though,did you hear who it might be?

nubo

This was posted a while back, not much info though. http://forum.hunting.net/asppg/tm.asp?m=698308
It would be nice to find out the specifics. If four more companies go under that would suck.

Heard the same thing. Not sure what other companies may or may not be involved. Keep us posted if you hear anything.

This doesn't sound good for Champion and it's too darn bad because they do have a quality product .I think this is a shame.

nubo

Nubo , my buddy who was a Champion dealer said they couldn't tell him who else was involved.
I have a hunch of two others based on the same draw length module but I better keep my mouth shut for now.

There was quite a discussion about Champion over on archerytalk last week. Seems that everybody that should be in the know about any details is keeping a low profile and being extremely tight lipped.

Doesn't Mathews and BowTech use designs that are copied from Martin and other bow manufacturers, but claim they design whatever and are the only manufacturer that has their design?

My buddy said the same thing. He said the guy he spoke with on the phone was very tight lipped about the whole thing , especially about what other companys are involved.

The only design that I can think of off hand is Mathews harmonic dampeners. Martin came out with VEB (vibration escape modules) in 95. But then again a deal could have been swung to use the solo cam technology.

Or...by using the same principle but changing the design allows for a legal loophole.