Jerry/Pa

I' m starting this post is reference to the 99% let-off bow on another post. Let me say I' m a technology nut. The knowledge I' ve pick-up from this site on the techie part of this sport is unbelievable. I also think technology has done great things for archery/bowhunting over the years. Other then my own couriousity how this 99%let-off bow works I don' t think it will do any good at all for this sport. Do we need to step back and look at some equipment restriction in bowhunting? Look at the pressure The P&Y Club is under to change there let-off rule? I' ve had this dicussion on other site' s and it' s a very personal issue for some of the more trad. shooters. To the point that they want to splinter off from us compound shooters and have there own season. Before I go off on my disertation I' m courious to see what some of you think. JERRY

muzzyman88

I agree totally. There needs to be soemthing done about the advancements in technology in some respects. Just like with tournament archery, there needs to be equipment restrictions in the woods. Thats the reason it is " primative" weapons season. No, compound bows are not primitive weapons, but the idealogy behind them is.

A bow with 99% letoff is rediculous, and borders unethical in my opinion. What fun, or challenge is there in that? It seems that technology is some aspects is taking away the challenging parts of our sport. Whats next, a bow that is already drawn and all you need to do is pick it up, point it, and fire. (crossbow?)

I' m not saying I dont use a couple handicap things that make a world of difference. My rangefinder comes to mind. But I limit myself on how far I will go to make it easier. There is no way a 99% letoff bow will find its way into my hands.

Danny45

Technology has one, and only one, driving factor (in my opinion). Money. If they build it, we (collectively) will come. I' ve tried darn near every gimmick out there and can truthfully say, NONE of it made me a better shooter or hunter. I was just as accurate with my old Ben Pearson 2300C compound bow as I have been with the newer bows. A sight is a sight. Some are better built, but do we really need tritium night sights? Do we really need 80-99% let off? Does the whisker biscuit work better than the old TM Hunter? It' s all in the eyes of the beholder and as long as we buy it, they' ll build it.

c903

Hooray! Three shooters who know which is a hole in the ground.

JOE PA

I have no interest at all in a 99% letoff bow. Heck, I prefer 65% to 80 myself. I would bet that a 99% letoff bow would be very hard to shoot with consistency.

Redpath

I own a Mathews Lx 80% letoff. The technology behind it allows me to cleanly kill my prey. Will a 99% letoff bow put a P&Y buck in my peepsight? Is it more efficient than a rifle? A crossbow? A longbow? All will kill an animal.
There is a saying that there is no such thing as a fair fight.

Too much technology? Maybe when they come out with 14 point buck, heat seeking arrows. Where can I get some? [>:]

PABowhntr

I have no interest in purchasing a 99% letoff bow either though I do like that people continue to experiment with new designs. I also will offer no argument against placing future restrictions of some sort on what archery equipment can and cannot be used for bowhunting. However, I think that those restrictions should be based on our current level of equipment in comparison to what may be introduced in the future. In other words, do not try to restrict something that I may already be using. I believe this path would allow for the least amount of opposition.

Jerry/Pa

I' m not sure if this belongs here or the bowhunting form but since I spend most of my time here I posted in the technology form. I' m not suprised this thread didn' t get a lot of responce. Seems the people who shoot modern equip. are less concernd with the technology doom of bowhunting. I totally agree with that. If anything technology has lifted bowhunting/archery to a higher level for more people to enjoy this sport. With the newer materials and disign it has made the bow more efficient. Not that it will eliminate bad hits or replace woodsmanship. I visit other site that bash technology and want to splinter away from the compound shooters. I can' t understand the reasoning behind there thinking and have failed to open there eyes to the advantage technology has been to bowhunting/archery. Some make good point but most don' t hold water.

Now here' s where I contradict myself. With all I have just said I think with this 99%let-off bow we my be real close to the line. IBO and ASA have restrictions. Pope and Young also. Do we need the state gaming commissions implanting restrictions to bowhunting? I know the gagets don' t work in a hunting situation and don' t last. It seems the sport has bee self leveling when it comes to technology. BUT how close are we. I tkink we' re pretty close. JERRY

Danny45

I agree to a point. But I believe it' s gone beyond that point in the last 10 years. I know when I started, there were compound bows, 65% let-off, over-draws, Aluminum arrows, Thunderhead broadheads, mechanical releases, adjustable sights, bow and hip quivers, short bows, and more longer bows for finger shooters.

What has come about in the past 10 years that has made your statement more true than the time period I' m talking about? Fiber optic sights, one cam bows, 80% let-off, carbon arrows, and mechanical broadheads? I don' t see how any of those makes it easier for more people to enjoy the sport. At least not more so than the period I' m talking about before. In fact, there' s maybe 3 new bows out there that I would feel comfortable shooting, since I' m a finger shooter. So in some ways, they' ve made it harder for some people to continue to enjoy the sport.

PABowhntr

Danny,

I have to be honest with you. I am having a hard time differentiating between the first and second groups you listed there. Both are different types of equipment that are used for bowhunting. How a single cam bow would be differentiated from a dual cam bow when presented in this context is a little difficult for me to comprehend. Would you care to elaborate further?