Dropaway conversation
02-26-2009, 07:42 AM
#1
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 3,058
Dropaway conversation
My friend who runs my local shop and I were having a healthy discussion the other night regarding dropaway rests after talking about the limbdriver.
Basically there are two theories
Theory 1- characterised by "instant drop" rests like the Trophy Taker, QAD series, and a multitude of others that attach to the "down" cable. The theory with these is that the launcher gets off the arrow as quickly as possible- therefore making your shot less suscpetible to shooting form errors- notably torque at the bow hand. The problem with this style rest is that a poor tune (nocking point height), borderline arrow spine, and poor nocking travel of the bow in question can really hurt you with this style rest- as there is no cushion or guidance to keep things moving along in a relatively straight line.
which brings us to
Theory 2- Characterised by "late drop" rests like the Limbdriver, and Whammy from Spot Hogg which attach to the bow limb or "up" cable. The idea here is that the launcher stays up for a longer period of time, offering much of the forgiveness of a "spring rest" for most of the forward travel, and then dropping away right before the fletchings pass over. The downside of course is that like a conventional rest, bow hand torque has greater potential to be a problem.
My friend is a proponent of Theory #1- seeing many more guys who have bow hand torque issues roll through the shop and citing the QAD/TT style as a far more viable option for the masses.While he doesn't turn away anyone away from the LD or Whammy, he doesn't sell many except for those looking specifically for them.
I did not necc take a side, but agreed that both systems have their advantages and disadvantages and that I still was not familiar enough with the Limbdriver to give any kind of "ultimate" answer as I have much more time (in years past) on the Trophy Taker style. Initially I will say that I am seeing that when I have a minor (and often major!) collapse in form at the shot, I can see my groups open up quite a bit with the limbdriver compared to the QAD I was shooting previously. But I also noticed that when I'm "on" I group a little tighter on average with the Limbdriver.
Your thoughts on these theories?
Basically there are two theories
Theory 1- characterised by "instant drop" rests like the Trophy Taker, QAD series, and a multitude of others that attach to the "down" cable. The theory with these is that the launcher gets off the arrow as quickly as possible- therefore making your shot less suscpetible to shooting form errors- notably torque at the bow hand. The problem with this style rest is that a poor tune (nocking point height), borderline arrow spine, and poor nocking travel of the bow in question can really hurt you with this style rest- as there is no cushion or guidance to keep things moving along in a relatively straight line.
which brings us to
Theory 2- Characterised by "late drop" rests like the Limbdriver, and Whammy from Spot Hogg which attach to the bow limb or "up" cable. The idea here is that the launcher stays up for a longer period of time, offering much of the forgiveness of a "spring rest" for most of the forward travel, and then dropping away right before the fletchings pass over. The downside of course is that like a conventional rest, bow hand torque has greater potential to be a problem.
My friend is a proponent of Theory #1- seeing many more guys who have bow hand torque issues roll through the shop and citing the QAD/TT style as a far more viable option for the masses.While he doesn't turn away anyone away from the LD or Whammy, he doesn't sell many except for those looking specifically for them.
I did not necc take a side, but agreed that both systems have their advantages and disadvantages and that I still was not familiar enough with the Limbdriver to give any kind of "ultimate" answer as I have much more time (in years past) on the Trophy Taker style. Initially I will say that I am seeing that when I have a minor (and often major!) collapse in form at the shot, I can see my groups open up quite a bit with the limbdriver compared to the QAD I was shooting previously. But I also noticed that when I'm "on" I group a little tighter on average with the Limbdriver.
Your thoughts on these theories?
02-26-2009, 07:57 AM
#2
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: Dropaway conversation
For 90% of the shooters out there, Theory Number 1 makes the most sense. Maybe even 95% of the bowhunters. There is a big difference in 3d or even field target shooting and real hunting. The problem I see with the conversation is when a target shooter meets a hunter.
Thats the reason I was such a fan of the MZE. You could make it stay up long enough, total containment, worked well. One does not need to be able to hit 2" groups at 50 yards to get the job done on deer. I am all for accuracy, but learning more and more its about what is practical.
Thats the reason I was such a fan of the MZE. You could make it stay up long enough, total containment, worked well. One does not need to be able to hit 2" groups at 50 yards to get the job done on deer. I am all for accuracy, but learning more and more its about what is practical.
02-26-2009, 08:01 AM
#3
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Brampton Ontario Canada
Posts: 1,038
RE: Dropaway conversation
Jeff, really there's not much to add to your two theories. I honestly feel you've hit the nail on the head.
Like you've mentioned no rest will help a shooter if the arrow is incorrectly spined, if a shotter has bad hand form (torque) and if their follow thru is absent, (holding steady).
Nevertheless, just like some bows, I too feel that some rests are more forgiving, to an extent.
You have already made mention of those circumstances in your thread above.
Keep 'em coming Jeff. I enjoy reading your educated thoughts
.
Like you've mentioned no rest will help a shooter if the arrow is incorrectly spined, if a shotter has bad hand form (torque) and if their follow thru is absent, (holding steady).
Nevertheless, just like some bows, I too feel that some rests are more forgiving, to an extent.
You have already made mention of those circumstances in your thread above.
Keep 'em coming Jeff. I enjoy reading your educated thoughts
.
02-26-2009, 08:10 AM
#4
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Central PA
Posts: 2,299
RE: Dropaway conversation
bigcountry, you bring up a very good point. For the masses, most will say and notice that theory #1 is more consistant for them, especially at hunting distances.
For the guys that have good form and shoot very well, then theory #2 is perhaps the way to go. However, in most cases, traditional drop aways are still more than adequate for a hunting setup.
Me, I'm on the fence. I'm a hunter first and foremost, but I also want the most accuracy I can obtain. For me, that is the LD or Whammy.
For the guys that have good form and shoot very well, then theory #2 is perhaps the way to go. However, in most cases, traditional drop aways are still more than adequate for a hunting setup.
Me, I'm on the fence. I'm a hunter first and foremost, but I also want the most accuracy I can obtain. For me, that is the LD or Whammy.
02-26-2009, 08:28 AM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: Dropaway conversation
ORIGINAL: muzzyman88
bigcountry, you bring up a very good point. For the masses, most will say and notice that theory #1 is more consistant for them, especially at hunting distances.
For the guys that have good form and shoot very well, then theory #2 is perhaps the way to go. However, in most cases, traditional drop aways are still more than adequate for a hunting setup.
Me, I'm on the fence. I'm a hunter first and foremost, but I also want the most accuracy I can obtain. For me, that is the LD or Whammy.
bigcountry, you bring up a very good point. For the masses, most will say and notice that theory #1 is more consistant for them, especially at hunting distances.
For the guys that have good form and shoot very well, then theory #2 is perhaps the way to go. However, in most cases, traditional drop aways are still more than adequate for a hunting setup.
Me, I'm on the fence. I'm a hunter first and foremost, but I also want the most accuracy I can obtain. For me, that is the LD or Whammy.
02-26-2009, 08:54 AM
#6
Super Moderator
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Southeast Central Illinois USA
Posts: 6,969
RE: Dropaway conversation
Not to sound like a sour apple, its always been about form IMO with any rest you shoot unless the rest is absolute junk. Although theory one may sound good I don't quite buy it. My simple and uneducated reasoning is before these dropaways became popular we all used shoot through rests or at least flipper rests. Maybe I am looking at this wrong, but I don't see any dropaway rest being more accurate than a good shoot through rest. Even with questionable form.
I do know that for me at least, I seem to tune better when I can get my dropaway to fall later rather than sooner. BG mentioned the Muzzy. I shot one for the last 2 years on my Patriot and like it. But I had a heck of a time tuning it/timing it for various reasons. No index scale, adjusting it was more trial and error than it should have been. Once I got it the best I could it presented no problems though. Its still on there. I just don't want the hassle of mounting another one and it is sort of ugly[8D].
I do know that for me at least, I seem to tune better when I can get my dropaway to fall later rather than sooner. BG mentioned the Muzzy. I shot one for the last 2 years on my Patriot and like it. But I had a heck of a time tuning it/timing it for various reasons. No index scale, adjusting it was more trial and error than it should have been. Once I got it the best I could it presented no problems though. Its still on there. I just don't want the hassle of mounting another one and it is sort of ugly[8D].
02-26-2009, 09:15 AM
#7
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Alvo Nebraska USA
Posts: 2,057
RE: Dropaway conversation
ORIGINAL: JeffB
My friend who runs my local shop and I were having a healthy discussion the other night regarding dropaway rests after talking about the limbdriver.
Basically there are two theories
Theory 1- characterised by "instant drop" rests like the Trophy Taker, QAD series, and a multitude of others that attach to the "down" cable. The theory with these is that the launcher gets off the arrow as quickly as possible- therefore making your shot less suscpetible to shooting form errors- notably torque at the bow hand. The problem with this style rest is that a poor tune (nocking point height), borderline arrow spine, and poor nocking travel of the bow in question can really hurt you with this style rest- as there is no cushion or guidance to keep things moving along in a relatively straight line.
which brings us to
Theory 2- Characterised by "late drop" rests like the Limbdriver, and Whammy from Spot Hogg which attach to the bow limb or "up" cable. The idea here is that the launcher stays up for a longer period of time, offering much of the forgiveness of a "spring rest" for most of the forward travel, and then dropping away right before the fletchings pass over. The downside of course is that like a conventional rest, bow hand torque has greater potential to be a problem.
My friend is a proponent of Theory #1- seeing many more guys who have bow hand torque issues roll through the shop and citing the QAD/TT style as a far more viable option for the masses.While he doesn't turn away anyone away from the LD or Whammy, he doesn't sell many except for those looking specifically for them.
I did not necc take a side, but agreed that both systems have their advantages and disadvantages and that I still was not familiar enough with the Limbdriver to give any kind of "ultimate" answer as I have much more time (in years past) on the Trophy Taker style. Initially I will say that I am seeing that when I have a minor (and often major!) collapse in form at the shot, I can see my groups open up quite a bit with the limbdriver compared to the QAD I was shooting previously. But I also noticed that when I'm "on" I group a little tighter on average with the Limbdriver.
Your thoughts on these theories?
My friend who runs my local shop and I were having a healthy discussion the other night regarding dropaway rests after talking about the limbdriver.
Basically there are two theories
Theory 1- characterised by "instant drop" rests like the Trophy Taker, QAD series, and a multitude of others that attach to the "down" cable. The theory with these is that the launcher gets off the arrow as quickly as possible- therefore making your shot less suscpetible to shooting form errors- notably torque at the bow hand. The problem with this style rest is that a poor tune (nocking point height), borderline arrow spine, and poor nocking travel of the bow in question can really hurt you with this style rest- as there is no cushion or guidance to keep things moving along in a relatively straight line.
which brings us to
Theory 2- Characterised by "late drop" rests like the Limbdriver, and Whammy from Spot Hogg which attach to the bow limb or "up" cable. The idea here is that the launcher stays up for a longer period of time, offering much of the forgiveness of a "spring rest" for most of the forward travel, and then dropping away right before the fletchings pass over. The downside of course is that like a conventional rest, bow hand torque has greater potential to be a problem.
My friend is a proponent of Theory #1- seeing many more guys who have bow hand torque issues roll through the shop and citing the QAD/TT style as a far more viable option for the masses.While he doesn't turn away anyone away from the LD or Whammy, he doesn't sell many except for those looking specifically for them.
I did not necc take a side, but agreed that both systems have their advantages and disadvantages and that I still was not familiar enough with the Limbdriver to give any kind of "ultimate" answer as I have much more time (in years past) on the Trophy Taker style. Initially I will say that I am seeing that when I have a minor (and often major!) collapse in form at the shot, I can see my groups open up quite a bit with the limbdriver compared to the QAD I was shooting previously. But I also noticed that when I'm "on" I group a little tighter on average with the Limbdriver.
Your thoughts on these theories?
I'm still using mine and about all my extended family members are too
02-26-2009, 09:42 AM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
RE: Dropaway conversation
An easy test I did to see which theory makes sense was to shoot thru paper and bareshaft. On the test, one one set of arrows, grip the handle as hard as you can, then another set of shots, shoot in strained position where form cannot be perfect. You got to be creative. But any hunter has seen strained shots.
Then put on a rest that stays up 80% of the time like a LD. Repeat and see your results. Espeically bareshafted. See which one is more forgiving.
Then put on a rest that stays up 80% of the time like a LD. Repeat and see your results. Espeically bareshafted. See which one is more forgiving.
02-26-2009, 10:04 AM
#9
Typical Buck
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location:
Posts: 654
RE: Dropaway conversation
All this tech. talk has gotten to me. I've tried hard to get used to my Limbdriver but it ain't happening. Everytime I pick up my bow to go out back and shoot (which is everyday) all I think about is rest timing, clearance, containment,that damn cable in my line of sight and the noise it makes as the control cable snaps back to the loaded position (kind of like popping a towel). I'm real good at killing animals but I'm not cut out to be a tech guy.
Don't take this wrong I wish I was smart enough to understand all this stuff but admit that I'm not. I'm going back to the simple life and my three prong containment rest. If anyone wants to try out a Limbdriver PM me and I will send you mine. I'm serious. I'm going out back to make friends with my bow again! 
Dan
Don't take this wrong I wish I was smart enough to understand all this stuff but admit that I'm not. I'm going back to the simple life and my three prong containment rest. If anyone wants to try out a Limbdriver PM me and I will send you mine. I'm serious. I'm going out back to make friends with my bow again! Dan
02-26-2009, 10:24 AM
#10
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 305
RE: Dropaway conversation
Thanks for the post Jeff and BC. I have been thinking along such lines as well but not to the extent you have brought out. For me, I tend to go along with theory 1. However, I have never claimed to be the best shot in all hunting situations and that's whereit's atfor me. Since I have both the QAD and the LD, now that I have read this I believe I will be doing some more testing in the near future.
Ed
Ed