ArthurP -
Everyone says that centershot on the MQ1 is 13/16" and mine is set just inside of that by 1/16" . The only thing that is hard for me to understand is why would the bare shaft show up as a weak spine instead of stiff? And why would the fix be to move the rest to the right I read that in the easton book.
You may be on to something here, I have a bare 2315 shaft at home and I will try it when i get home and I guess I should get a 2215 and try it with the rest at 13/16" and see what happens.

CapstoneME,
I keep reading that with the bare shafts hitting right I need to move the rest to the right and I' m inside of center shot now. You are right on the torque, I have to really work on keeping my hand relaxed and when I do, i get good bullet holes through paper.

I would like to thank everyone for taking the time to help me get a better understanding of what I' m doing.

Keep this thread going, I' m learning alot.

Your bareshaft is telling you your rest is off to the right, not that the arrow is weak. Set the rest back at 13/16ths, then beg borrow or steal several bare shafts in different spines and see which one shoots best.

Only change one thing at one time or you' ll wind up like a dog that' s chasing it' s tail.... lots of running but getting nowhere fast.

Arthur P,

Well there is nothing to make the arrow flex in the left/right plane if your shooting a caliper release, string loop, etc.

The reason that it DOES flex in the vertical is the nocking point is NEVER reeled back in perfectly level on any bow. Even on twin eccentrics, there will always be at least some degree of difference between top and bottom.

The rest only determines direction at the time of launch. If you are going off to the side, it' s not CAUSED by spine, it' s because of centershot settings or torque at time of launch, which are holding the arrow in some direction other that the exact path the nock takes during the shot.

There' s no need to have anything for an arrow to " paradox against" during the power stroke. If you are controling arrow flight by having your rest push against the shaft, you' re treating symptoms, not addressing root causes.

Again, " paradox" , as you call it, or oscillation, ONLY happens in a direction/plane that there is force on the arrow. With a drop away, your only task is to align the rest so that at the time of release, the nock point (rear arrow node) is shoved in a path that aligns it with the tip (front node), so that you load the shaft " staight down the tube."

From that point (the point of having centershot and nock point in positions that allow force to be shoved down the shaft) they only oscillations are generated from movements in the source of the force that do not lie in that " straight ahead path" .

Finger release, for instance causes the nock point to jerk suddenly back in line after nocking the fingers out of the way: the arrow “paradoxes” right/left. My original Max cam reels in the nock point on an up/down path, generating vertical oscillations. In using a MZE rest, I do not lose anything by have not having a rest that “pushes” back against the shaft. All I have to do is ALIGN the rest so that the shaft points in the general path that the nock will take during the shot. Then, SPINE adjustments show up as problems in the arrow recovering from the nock point path variations. I don’t have to have a rest that dampens the arrow “paradox”, I just tweak my poundage until my spine equals that necessary for good flight.


Rac,

Scrap the " everybody says" measurement (Mathews provides that as a " starting point" , it won' t be exact except for a few folks.) That' s one point I tried to make in my first post: everybody induces their OWN amount of torque and centershot is THE thing to adjust to cancel out YOUR torque. That' s why some tech can' t tune your bow and hand it to you and it be set up for your body. Bows are not rifles.

I' d say you' re moving your rest in the wrong direction. The bare shaft planing test rule of thumb I' ve developed is this:
The fletchings " pull" the point of the arrow in-line to match them during flight.

So, if the fletched ones hit left of bare shafts, this means the arrow departed the bow with the point to the right, the fletch to the left. During flight, the fletchings pulled the point over to match them. Therefore, I' d say you need to move the point of the arrow (this is also the rest) over to the left, to be " in front of" the fletchings.

CapstoneMe,

That all makes good sense to me. I will try adjusting the arrow rest to the left and see what happens.

So how important is arrow spine with my set up?

It seems to me that if there is nothing for the arrow to paradox against then is spine really a issue?

Thanks

Rac, to weak a spine will cause inefficient energy transfer from the bow to the shaft, and the arrow will take much longer to recover, which could impede penetration.

With a straight down the pipe release, it' s better to be to stiff than to weak, per Bob Ragsdale' s writings...

Rac,
My experience, (aided thru Bob Ragsdale' s writings among others), is that if you go to a straight ahead release (like you' ve got), then just " GO STIFF" and forget about it.

I think I COULD get too stiff because of my nock travel issues, but you' re probably better off than me having a Straight-Line Maxcam. Having said that, I' ve gone about as stiff as possible (with available arrows and cut lengths) with my most recent purchases and am having the best broadhead flight and bare shaft results of my archery days.

I have a FeatherMax, 30" draw, around 60-62# (I haven' t checked or cared since tuning draw weight to match my arrows), shooting 28" Beman ICS Hunters with 100 gr muzzys. I had been using GT 5575' s cut to 27" with good results, too.

P.S.- Adding to Rangeball' s post: spine may not be as critical with a drop away because even large amounts of flex (from an underspined shaft) would not result in clearance problems, where you' d be bouncing the arrow off the rest, etc. BUT: spine is ALWAYS critical in broadhead setups because a weak shaft will flex excessively, allowing the broadhead' s blades to catch more air and thus control the flight of the arrow.

Rachunter most of tuning is trial and error , sometimes what works is the oppisite of what the tuneing charts tell ya . I would go with authers sugestion and try putting a turn on each limb bolt and see if your groups dont start to get closer , if not try taking a half to one turn off each limb bolt and go from there . Let us know what works for you . If you are dead on 60 lbs I would guess that you are overspined , Try putting a turn in your limbs and useing 125 grain heads and see what happens . I thought you had a 6o lb model maxed out and that is why I made the sugestions I did in my first post .

Paradox as ' I' call it, Capstone?? I' ve been around a long time, but not THAT long. I didn' t coin the term. It' s been called paradox since long before I even born!

Frankly, I don' t see paradox as an enemy like you seem to. I think it makes life a lot easier for you when you know how to control it. It covers up a lot of unavoidable shortcomings.

Trying to eliminate paradox is going about things the hard way, because there is no such thing as: a bow with perfectly straight and level nock travel that never need tuning; arrows that don' t flex at all; strings/cables that are zero stretch and NEVER creep; shooters that never make the slightest mistake in shooting form. Until those four items are perfected (especially the last one), I don' t see any sense in trying to launch arrows ' straight down the pipe.'

Whoa, Arthur, I wasn' t trying to start anything. I knew what you meant. My engineering background has engrained in me the term " oscillation." Although commonly used, " paradox" is not a proper term for the movement of the arrow. The definition is, paraphrased, " something that has seemingly contradictory characteristics" . It came into archery because, before the development of cut-away risers and release aides, when the arrow sat on the rest it pointed to the left but for " some reason" it shot straight. (Thus the apparent contradiction.) The answer to the paradox is not that " the arrow bends" , but that " when shooting fingers, the tail of the arrow is kicked to the left (creating a straight-ahead situation)" . The side effect is that the arrow now oscillates side-to-side all the way to the target.

So, I' m really not trying to eliminate paradox because the equipment manufacturers already did that with cutaway risers and caliper releases.

I' m not trying to eliminate all arrow flex, either. I agree with all the points you made. I know the arrow flexes. Like I told Rac, I NEED the flex because my cam is creating vertical oscillations (worse than the newer " straight nock travel" bows.) My point is that when the arrow flexes, just like when you pluck a taut string, there are two nodes (" still" spots) at the front and rear, and THOSE are what you want the force directed down. You are absolutely correct that even stiff arrows oscillate. What I really want instead of " straight down the tube" is " straight down the NODES."

Cap, with a " straight down the nodes" release, are you tuning for a bullet hole, or for the 11 o' clock tear that seems to be desired by many here?

I' ve always had trouble understanding why a properly spined or stiffer shaft released straight down the pipe/nodes with a behind the nock release needs this high left tear to properly correct arrow flight. All my ACCs tuned to bullet holes shoot to the same point of impact (at least to 30 yards which is the farthest I' ll shoot unless conditions are ideal, then a bit further) if I do my part.