TFOX

I am not very happy with OT2 either.I prefer Archer Advantage but I don't trust any of them when figuring speed,atleast with AA,it can be calibrated accurately to my bows specs.

sngehl01

[quote] I do agree with all the equations and all the test you have posted,but there is ALWAYS that exception to the rule.[8D] [/qoute]

All it takes is one exception to make a scientific law no longer a law or a scientific theory no longer a theory.

Really, scientific laws are not proven, they have only yet to be disproved.

JoeRE

Good Post. Let there be sanity! Aparently some people are incapable of it. As usuall, random facts and theories are made to fit arguments - not the other way around as would better be done. Not one shred of evidence exists ( and I read most of the links!) that indicates a bow ALWAYS gains KE (not to mention momentum!) as more and more mass is added to the projectile. A compound bow is a complex energy system where no two are identical. All systems, in the real world (including various frictional effects, limb resiliance(sp), etc) have a operating peak efficency. Its that simple. What the virtual work papers showed is what a theoretical system contains. A typical redutio ad absurdum argument.

Sylvan

THe claim here is that on some bows an increase in arrow mass will cause a reduction in ke.MeanV says he has seenit between 400 and 500 grains. That is counter to the accepted physics which I have posted for you and from several different sources too, so I say that an increase in arrow mass will always result in a reduction in ke. Now if you're right, it should be a very simple matter of posting the results ofjust onetest from a competent lab that supports your claim. If the energy efficiency equation is wrong some of the time then put up or shut up. Show us the data. If you're right, it should be easy, you need find only one exception to the rule.

There are mountains of data from competent labs showing ke always increasing as a function of mass (i've posted some for you) but you obviously can't test every bow that has ever been made in order to prove it's always true just like you can't test every force that has ever acted on every mass to prove F=ma. But until somebody comes along with a confirmed test that shows the exception then the rule stands and you guys are just blowing smoke.

MeanV2

Just One??

bigbulls got the same results with a 400 vs a 500 grain arrow out of the same model bowalso.

So it's not just 1.

Call me out if you want. Heck come and read my chrono yourself and figure the KE for yourself.

Just maybe you can find where my tests were so Flawed!

Dan

Sylvan

You know what I mean. One test published and confirmed by a comptent testing lab like the data I posted for you earlier. Backyard data by a couple of internet unknowns (I'm being nice) justdoesn't cut the credibility mustard. Again, if you're right, it should be easy. But you won't find it because you're simply wrong in your assertion. Time to quit with the rhetoric and post a link to published data that backs you up.

MeanV2

Gotta give it you Sylvan! You are persistent if not the smartest chip on the Block[8D]

Not many will ignore facts and stick with a theory. Read the thread I think you will find youare in the minority. These 2 nobodies as you have called us have probably tested more bows hands on than you have shot.

Feel free to post more links. I think everyone is really impressed

Dan

bigbulls

Look, you can sit there and post about all the "accepted physics theories" all you want but that does not change the weights of the arrowsor the speed at which they were traveling when they were shot from the same bow. We aren't making this up or pulling it out of our butts. MeanV stated that it happened to him so I wanted to see for my self and low and behold it happened for me as well. I don't know where he lives but it certainly isn't down here the panhandle of Florida.

It is what it is. If you want to keep with your theories then so be it but facts are facts. You can either accept the FACT that twocompletely different82nd's, hundreds of miles away from each other,lost KE with a heavier arrow or not. It really doesn't matter one way or the other and all of your theories will not change the FACT that it did happen to both of us.

If you would like to put up the money to foot the bill to have these two bows sent off to the lab of your choice thenI will be more than willing to shipmy bow for you.Or you can purchase an 82'nd yourself and shoot all the various weights that you want to and post your findings for all of us to read. It will cost you $749.00. We accept all credit cards, money orders, Paypal, Certified checks. If not then justshut up.

In fact I think that it is actually your turn to do some testing isn't it. Isn't that the way it works? Someone, be it internet nobodies or internationally recognised scientists, tests and comes up with figures, then if someone else doesn't agree with those figures it is up to that person to disprove the figures. Not the person that came up with the original figures.

We tested and came up with our numbers. It is now on you to prove us wrong with some real testing and not some googled articles. So, put up or shut up.

OHbowhntr

Sylvan,
Are you confusing KE w/ Momentum??? Anything you look at will show you that at a certain point, momentum will drop off, but that point will almost always be much higher (weight) wise than it with KE.

I've tried to stay clear of this, but at this point I just can't!!! KE is figured by multiplying MASS X .5 of Velocity SQUARED. IF the MASS changes, so will the velocity when using a constant force against it, unless you only have enough FORCE to move a paper clip, and you are trying to push an elephant or a milk jug, then regardless of the MASS, the velocity will still be ZERO, and the MASS will have not effect on the velocity. But in our perfect world, we wouldn't waste time trying to "theorize" such simple things. A constant FORCE will have an OPTIMAL curve when put in motion. Look at the FORCE CURVE of a compound bow, and match it up with certain MASSES, and you will find there is an optimal mass that when the force curve is applied to it, will result in the greatest usage of energy. If I hit a pingpong ball with a golf club, it will never go as far as a golfball, even if it were as durable. Likewise, if I use that same golf club and whack a softball, there is going to be a degree of lost efficiency. Can I measure that, not really, I don't have the equipment to do it, nor the desire to break my wrist trying to whack a softball as hard as I might a golf ball. But this is good example of the EFFICIENCY grading when using the same applied "accelerational force" to objects of different masses. A golf ball is optimal in this situation, and I will guarantee will achieve a MUCH greater KINETIC ENERGY over either the pingpong ball, or the softball.

If you'd READ your article by KOOI very well, you'd have seen this here: "So, by our theory Kh is definitely not indepen-
dent (poorly worded, but they are saying it is DEPENDENT upon) of the mass of the arrow in the case of the H bow." If you'd READ the article, you'd know that they never really addressed bow efficiency and KE gain or losses in relationship to arrow mass, it addressed arrow tip mass and KE though. Much of what is in the article is more or less useless in this arguement as well because MOST people could never understand what the hell they are reading as they read that thing anyhow. Read some of this.... ( http://www.kineticpulse.com/ ) it will help a little. No my bow will not shoot a 300gr TWICE as fast as a 600gr arrow but if it did, the 300gr arrow would carry far more energy than the 600 grain arrow wouldn't it??? But theory would tell you it should???? Or should it??? Again, it comes back to a force curve.

You arrogance and calling people names makes you a difficult person to like, being wrong while attacking others makes you a difficult person to respect.

bigcountry

Dad gone ole syl is so out of his element he is sad now. I almost feel bad for him.I can just feel the bandwidth he is wasting right now doing google searches because honestly Doug, he does not understand what you are saying. Your wasting your time with trying to show him.

Hey sylly, when you going to show us some of that science you work on. Not some web search. Come on man, I bet if you try just a little harder, you might impress someone.

Did I call it or what?
I figured you out, why you spend "loser time" on here pleading for people to take you seriously. You have no friends or life. I think I got a winner.