Another tuning question!
#11
RE: Another tuning question!
Sounds like your nock set is just a bit high.Ahighset will cause the low leftimpact if you are a right hand shooter.Loosen your nock set slightlythat you can turn it on the serving. Give it 1/2 to 1 turn down and lightly tighten it on your serving. This will not only remove the low impact, but also the left as you correct. Take a few shots and see if your impact is closerortogether with the broadhead. Your equipment is matchedand is very close to set up. If you know how to bare shaft tune you can correct this problem in no time.
#12
RE: Another tuning question!
What geranamo posted is good advise , the type of cams on your bow make a diferance allso . Do you have , a single , dual , or hybred camed bow . If a dual it may need creep tuned . if a single or hybred , nock point tweeking or tiller tuneing may help your up-down situation .
#13
RE: Another tuning question!
Geronimo made a good point:
You can't use paper tuning for broadheads.
Paper tune first, then bareshaft tune, then broadhead tune.
Either of the first two steps can be skipped becauseyou gain precision as you proceed through the steps. If you're not hunting with your bow then you can stop at bareshaft, or go on to fine/micro tuning. If you are hunting, you must end with BH tuning regardless of the other steps you take or skip.
Yimmy, you are already broadhead tuning by comparing the points of impact (POI) of FP arrows, and BH arrows. That's good, but paper can't help you now. You're doing exactly what you need to be doing.
Also, to clear up a bit of confusion, keep in mind that the adjustments for paper tuning vs bareshaft and BH tuning appear to be opposite because they are measuring opposite things. The paper shows which way the TAIL of the arrow is angledin relation to the point. Bareshaft and BH tuning show which way the POINT of the arrow is angled in relation to the tail. By definition, these two tests will appear to show opposite conditions. Don't get them confused. They really tell you the same thing, but you need to understand what they are saying. You should also know that lots of stuff can mess up paper results making you chase your tail, and paper can also show good flight when you don't actually have it. It's just a rough estimate.
In your case, the arrow is acting stiff (forget the paper results). The arrow is leaving the bow nock-right (and high), and therefore planing (catching the wind and being pushed)to the left (and low)during flight. The difference in POI should increase as you shoot further distances rather than be a constant 5" POI diff all the way out.
The cure is to make the adjustments Geronimo stated (they arequoted directly from the Easton BH tuning chapter, and they have a great foolproof graphic too), or if that does not fix it, get weaker arrows.
Note: The Easton shaft selection charts lean stiff for hunting arrows. Lots of people have hadprobs, and I've learned to shift my selections by one column towards the weaker side.
...when you actually should be using the broadhead tuning
Paper tune first, then bareshaft tune, then broadhead tune.
Either of the first two steps can be skipped becauseyou gain precision as you proceed through the steps. If you're not hunting with your bow then you can stop at bareshaft, or go on to fine/micro tuning. If you are hunting, you must end with BH tuning regardless of the other steps you take or skip.
Yimmy, you are already broadhead tuning by comparing the points of impact (POI) of FP arrows, and BH arrows. That's good, but paper can't help you now. You're doing exactly what you need to be doing.
Also, to clear up a bit of confusion, keep in mind that the adjustments for paper tuning vs bareshaft and BH tuning appear to be opposite because they are measuring opposite things. The paper shows which way the TAIL of the arrow is angledin relation to the point. Bareshaft and BH tuning show which way the POINT of the arrow is angled in relation to the tail. By definition, these two tests will appear to show opposite conditions. Don't get them confused. They really tell you the same thing, but you need to understand what they are saying. You should also know that lots of stuff can mess up paper results making you chase your tail, and paper can also show good flight when you don't actually have it. It's just a rough estimate.
In your case, the arrow is acting stiff (forget the paper results). The arrow is leaving the bow nock-right (and high), and therefore planing (catching the wind and being pushed)to the left (and low)during flight. The difference in POI should increase as you shoot further distances rather than be a constant 5" POI diff all the way out.
The cure is to make the adjustments Geronimo stated (they arequoted directly from the Easton BH tuning chapter, and they have a great foolproof graphic too), or if that does not fix it, get weaker arrows.
Note: The Easton shaft selection charts lean stiff for hunting arrows. Lots of people have hadprobs, and I've learned to shift my selections by one column towards the weaker side.
#14
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Kodiak, AK
Posts: 2,877
RE: Another tuning question!
One thing that everyone has failed to mention is that wrist torque causes a right tear (left impact). You'll see it more in a broadhead than with a field point. If your form is correct you could simply try moving your rest in slight increments that would adjust the broadhead group toward the field point group. The two groups should move closer together and arrow flight with the broadheads should improve. Once the two groups are nearly the same (you may not get them exact) you can fine tune the sight again.
#15
RE: Another tuning question!
ORIGINAL: JoshKeller
edit, yes left is stiff for right handed. I had spent the last 45 minutes tuning my uncles lefty bow when i posted this. my mistake
edit, yes left is stiff for right handed. I had spent the last 45 minutes tuning my uncles lefty bow when i posted this. my mistake