PABowhntr

Thank you for the kind words Rangeball....but you posted them in the wrong thread....

mrfritz44

I was looking for level nock travel......and thanks for all the replies so far. Now, if you guys could, critique this technique I've been using:

Use a bow square to place the nocking point according to the rest holes with the bottom line of the arrow on level with the imaginary line drawn between the bottom of the two rest holes. The bottom of the knocking point is also level to these two lines. Paper tune from close distance with a fletched arrow by moving only the rest to eliminate vertical tears.

I can eliminate tears with ease, but that hidden variable, the distance from the cam axle that the nock is most level throughout a shot, isn't taken into consideration...........think I just pointed out what was wrong with this technique. If this technique is flawed, how does the manufacturer determine where to place those rest holes? Do they have a magical formula that states where level nock travel exists?

With the adjustability of today's rests, I would think that unless the rest holes are vertically placed where they are for a reason, that moving the nocking point would be unnecessary. Or is it?![:-]


Fritz

mrfritz44

ttt

Roland from Calif.

mrfritz44,
please proceed to wear yourself out regarding nock travel.


http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showth...threadid=38710

Raymond van Halm

I like to pay attention to the nocktravel on my bows, but i cant see it. Those arrows travel to fast for my eye. So i looked little different at the subject.
For 3d i need speed and a flat trajectory. When i place my arrow completly square and level behing my string and the arrow over the same heigt as the arrowrest bold, i make as much speed as possible, shown on a digital speed device.
My 3D bow however was not delivered as a bow with a 'strait nock travel' .
My huntingbow does.
Eventho, on this bow i choose a little high nocklocater to get as much clear travel over the rest and so, less sound.
For my huntingbow i did not need speed as much as i need silence and impact.

The thing that makes you thinking about nocktravel is papertuning.
How much do we all want those perfect bulletholes while nobody sets up his/her bow for shooting on a piece of paper.
Papertuning is handy for adjustments on spine.
Nock travel is a thing that comes with your choice in setup.

Elkcrazy8

I don't care about level nock travel. Just as the others have posted. Grouping is more important. I go to the extremes on this but it pays big dividends on the 3-d range. I was having problems with my 30 yrd groups being better than 20 until I started group tuning. Bare shaft tuning is said to be used just for finger shooters. I have found it to be a big part in my group tuning with a release, I will do this at 20 yards. I adjust my rest until the bare shafts hit with my fletched arrows. After acheiving this I will then adjust my sights as needed. After going back to the paper I have found that the arrows shoot bullet holes. This is tough until you have your form down. If you do this and your form is shakey ,discount your flyers and it will give you a good idea. Using this method I have confidence that the arrow is spitting out straight and the fletches are just stabilizing the arrow and not correcting it. This will give you a flatter shooting arrow with more room for errors. It also pays off in the field as it makes it easier to get broadheads to tune at higher speeds.

mrfritz44

Yea, after reading all the hubbub about nock travel I'm not overly concerned about it. Could someone critique my tuning procedure and explain the disadvantages to performing a "move-nock-free" paper tune? This works in terms of eliminating the tears, but I have reservations about it since the bow may be nocked higher or lower than the manufacturer intended it to be.

ijimmy

Straightarrow said

I agree and think you are getting the two issues confused . In my first reply I answers your first question .

I would not atempt to answer your second question , nor would I trust what the manufactures say .

Len in Maryland

You should stop worrying about trying to 'fix' nock travel because it can't be done. It is inherent in the design of your bow/cam.

The straighter the nock travel, the easier it is to tune and allows a wider range of spine.

Testing nock travel can be done in many different ways. I choose machine that fixes the riser so that I can SEE the cam(s) at work and realize how they influence the string. Video observation does not 'fix' the riser and is therefore not see how the cam(s) affect the string movement. In other words, in the hands of a standard archer (unlike a machine used with video) the bow's riser will become more 'fixed' and bad nock travel will become more prevalent.

I recently had a bow that showed bad nock travel. My techs were very skeptical and asked my opinion because it tuned beautifully. I noticed that the nock travel had a cancelling affect similiar to a subject called "noise cancellation". I asked them to shoot a fixed BH. The fixed BH hit in the same hole as the FT with an expert shooter behind the bow. The nock travel variation did in fact have a cancelling effect and subsequently acted like straight and level nock travel.

Studying nock travel, unless you have the equipment and expertise, if a mind-blowing task and is not definable via this medium.

PABowhntr

Len,

If I may ask you a question on this subject? I understand your reasoning for wanting to see how the cam(s)' work in relation to the string/nock travel with a fixed position riser but do you think a fixed position riser trully represents what a bow does when it is actually shot? What I am trying to say is that don't we have to take into account that the riser and limbs flex quite a bit when the bow is fired. Wouldn't this affect nock travel?