UncleNorby - I use the EZeye to create a known starting point

Kanga - I will try your PM'd technique. You should share the info in a post. It's a great expedient method.

All - I realize that I am pole vaulting over mouse turds. I will shoot walk back this evening and try to let it go.

I hope you don't use to stiff of a pole and kick to the right if you try that........[8D]

hope you get it figured out!

It has him perfect at that poundage but as I told him in a pm,the program needs to be calibrated to actuall performance,which OT2 does not allow for accurately.You have to lie about poundage to get the speed where you need it.


I have yet to have any problems with spine using AA.I had problems on my first bow using OT2.That's when I contacted them (about the same time doegirl had issues with OT2)and that's when I learned speed plays no role in spine selection,it is cam style, so if my bow with a hard 1 cam is more efficient than your hard 1 cam,spine selection will be off for one of us.Even if the IBO of the 2 bows is the same.


I suspected centershot(or cam lean)from the beginning but if the Allegiance is shooting as fast as advertised at the shorter draw lengths,I still think they are underspined but without actuall chrono numbers,can't say for sure.

I have seen certain Bowtechs on shorter draw lengthsin the past not reach the speeds that AA says they should.IMO,that is due to modules instead of individuall cams forspecific draw lengths.(less efficient)

WHY I ASKED FOR CHRONY READING in a pm and here in this post.BUT,that is irrelevant because it isn't spine issues causing the tear.



I am just sharing my experience,not arguing per say.



I asked about the rest because some have had issues with a couple you mentioned,just trying to eliminate another possibility.If spine is right now and the rest is still bad,the tear wold still be present but the Trophy Taker is a fine rest,as long as the spine is correct.So I don't think that has any relevance.


UNLESS,the rest isn't mounted square with the arrow,then that puts more pressure on one side of the arrow and will cause the tear you have.

Grasping at straws,I have seen some weird things cause a tear.

Like I said in the pm,make sure you get your centershot correct(I prefer to walkback then group but others prefer french tuning)and keep it there,regardless of what the paper is telling you.

I will get a bow out blow the dust off and take some pics for a visual using the method I pm'd you about then post it.

Hey they might even make it a sticky

I can't wait.

That is not correct. You just change the default IBO speed setting (lower or higher) so that the calculated speed matches your chrono'd speed. I do the same thing in AA.

I am not saying one program is better than the other but there are idiosyncrasies to each program that you have to adjust to make either one of them as accurate as it can be.

I currently have the same bow and arrow setup in each program and OT2 shows the arrow on the weak side just out of optimum and AA shows the arrow to be just a hair to the weak side but almost in the middle of optimum. If I went by either program I could stillget my bow and arrow almost where it should be and then tuning would take care of the rest.

AA lets you print out awesome NFAA targets. Printing the targets in OT2 is a waste of time.

AA will not let you change the weight of the nock to the actual measured weight. OT2 will allow changes like that.

Both programs are good and they both have their advantages and disadvantages. You just have to know how to use them.

Sorry for the off topic post.

Change the default and then see if the actuall spine changed.It does not.

I contacted the company and he told me personally that they DO NOT use IBO rating for spine,they use cam performance.That is why they have the different cams listed.


You can use generic weight for nocks and enter any weight you want.Atleast on the latest version of AA you can,previous version you could not.That was one complaint I had when I beta tested that version.Glad to see he made the change.

Just so I was not mistaken,I just now took an Allegiance up to 400 fps IBO in thedatabase selection formand the spine match DID NOT change from what it said it should shoot at the factory default setting.

Sorry if I am sounding like a know it all but I have been round and round with the company about this.They agree that this is the way it is done.They used to use IBO rating,but hey told me that people were complaining that they didn't use the cam style so they switched.

I suggested that in the next version to have it be selectable between using IBO or cam style.I just personally feel that the ACTUALL speed plays a bigger role in what spine is need than the style of the cam.IBO is actuall performance and not based on POTENTIAL performance.


I do like some of the stuff on OT2,just think the spine form needs to be changed.


Sorry about the hijack guys.

I see and yes, you are absolutely correct.

I agree with you here. Hopefully they will make the change you suggested, be able to select IBO or actual speed.

LOL, I guess I'll just keep using both for now .

Sorry for the hijack also, hopefully we are done now LOL

At least the hijack is very interesting.

I will get the chrono reading with 5575's and 7595's on Monday.

The infamous Kanga-band center shot method and laser center shot are very, very close. After set-up (with both methods), I shot a lot walk back tonight with the 7595's. The forty yard group is roughly 2 inches to the left of centerline. I will shoot it again tomorrow and then make the very minor adjustment necessary to achieve an absolutely vertical line.

At 40 yards, the 7595's are grouping better (<3.5") than the 5575's and there is no perceptible difference in trajectory despite the heavier shaft. Here comes the next hijack: Does this mean I have gained some efficiency?