Bullet holes
 

Anyone have a few pics of what good and bad bullet holes look like? I shot into paper today at 6 feet...12 feet and about 20 feet. As I moved back my holes got better, but not sure if they are perfect.

RE: Bullet holes
 

These are very good but not "perfect"


But this is on a bow that I tuned in the yard to me and this is the tear afterward,I did not paper tune,I walk back tuned,bare shafted(checked in paper without fletching to check spine)and group tuned.


Here is a link to the methods I used.

http://www.huntingnet.com/forum/tm.aspx?m=2020182

RE: Bullet holes
 

TFox,

They look like the bow is pretty close. Looks like maybe a little nock low and a right tear, but as you said, "Not perfect but close". Whatever you need to do it's very little.

Because I use a blade launcher I usually look for a slightly high/left tear. Maybe 1/4" to 1/2". Of course I don't paper tune at all. Bare shaft, walk-back, etc. The paper shots I take are usually to satisfy somebody who asks why I don't paper tune. In reality I don't really care how the arrow shoots at 3, 6, or 15'. I don't shoot anything that close. Down range is where the action is.

RE: Bullet holes
 

TFOX,
If this is a walkback and group tune, then the paper results don't need to be perfect??? I am more concerned w/ bh flight matching fp's when it comes right down to it.
I am getting a perfect tear from both my bows but haven't walk back tuned them yet. Am I to assume settings will change?

RE: Bullet holes
 

You never know until you try:)

RE: Bullet holes
 

I'll never understand the not concerned about paper tear theory.......especially if you are shooting broadheads. Why would you NOT want the tip in front of the tail as much as you can possibly tune?

Even with field or target points if the arrow is coming off with a tear in any direction the second you have another outside influence such as inconsistent spine or fletching variation IMO you are going to get a more pronounced POI affect and flyers....especially with fixed blade broadheads.

How can you expect something that is basically coming off at an angle to be inherently accurate especially when you basically add "wings" to the front of your arrow in the case of fixed blade heads?

I saw it this summer testing all sorts of these new short "field point accurate" fixed blade heads......I wanted to see what they would do on a bow that was group tuned but had a poor paper tear. Some of these were downright HORRIBLE for consistent flight until I got it tuned to shoot bullet holes. One brand looked like I was throwing wiffle balls.........Once I corrected the tears it brought all the heads right in where they belong.

I still group tune and occaisionally walk back but I start with paper everytime after I set everything to proper center shot and height. I consider it a waste fo time to go right to the other 2 if the arrows are tearing like crap.......
I've been doing it like this forever and my results are pretty decent.

RE: Bullet holes
 

Not sure how good these pics will show up but here are my results.
First picture the 3 holes on theright from 6 feet the 3 on theleft from 12 feet. The last picture is all from 20 feet.

RE: Bullet holes
 

As an afterthought,I checked broadheads at 30 yards and I was hitting inside the same 1 1/2" circle with broadheads as I was with fieldpoints.


The #2 tear is the final tear after the final group tune.

I use mechanicals by choice so I am thinking this is a real good tune.;)

RE: Bullet holes
 

could it be possible that you are catching the arrow at an opportune time inthe paradox?try shooting from between 12 and 20 feet and farther than 20 feet and see what happens.

RE: Bullet holes
 

I'm not sure paper tuning beyond ten or twelve feet is going to tell you much. It's the tears in the 4' to 6' range that seem to be most meaningful.

RE: Bullet holes
 

I may not be an expert here but I believe that the6 ft. tears are showing a nock low and the rest needing to be moved to the left. Very minor movement in each case. The12 ft tears get better as stabalization occurs.The 20 ft tears are after the arrow has stabalized. They look great.
I think a little adjustment is needed. My $.02

RE: Bullet holes
 

Matt, I'll give you my opinion on this. No matter what I get when I paper tune, I never trust it completely. Was I at the right distance to get the most important reading? I alway walk-back and group tune to fine tune anything I might get from paper. After I'm grouped tuned, I don't care what the paper says. What can be better than field tested, perfect center shot and nock height?

I've seen guys spend 2 hours paper tuning their bows, only to walk-back and group tune afterwards. What sense did that 2 hours make? How can someone worry about was a tear in paper looks like and not care how the arrow performs in the field with a broadhead attached? If you do the field tuning, the paper tuning doesn't serve much purpose.

I find paper tuning to be most useful when testing cam syncronization on two cam bows or when looking to see how much an archer may be torquing a bow. When I set up a bow (by eye), I can almost guarantee it won't have more than a 1/2" tear, without any adjustments at all. This hold true as long as the shooter is not applying excess torque and the arrow spine is correct. In general, it'll be close enough to go straight to walk-back and group tuning. Tuning for that perfect paper tear, makes no sense to me.

RE: Bullet holes
 

Thanks Archer58

RE: Bullet holes
 

I am finger shooter; should I expect bullet holes when I paper tune?

RE: Bullet holes
 

Fishpoint, you can get great holes when shooting fingers.

But as mentioned above, it doesn't tell the whole story.

RE: Bullet holes
 

100% correct. tuning beyond about 6 feet is pointless. the farther the arrow flies the more it has opportunity to stabilize itself. perfect bullet holes at 20 feet are worthless IMO and is telling you nothing about arrow flight.