Recently I have been looking at new bows and had a few questions. I know that having a longer brace height makes for a more forgiving bow, and that a longer ATA also helps. But which factor is more important? Personally I would think brace height. For example how much of a change would there be from my current setup 34"ATA & 7.25" brace, to 38" ATA & 6.25 brace? My instincts say to go with the longer brace height. Also which is a better indicator of performance IBO or AMO ratings?

I found a formula on hunters friend.com that calculates a method of bow forgiveness. It goes like this:

(1.5 times ATA plus Brace Height) minus ( IBO divided by 10 )

This gives you a forgiveness percentage.

You may want to go to huntersfriend.com and check this out

IMO the reflex is more important than either the brace or a-a.I personally like to be at the middle ground of all three. 37"a-a with a 7" brace and a reflex of no more than 1 1/4". The reflex is actually one of the reasons that ibo rating was given in the above formula.High reflex will tend to increase speeds along with cam designs.


My dream setup is 38" a-a with a straight riser and 310 ibo along with an 8" brace.With a smooth drawing cam 1/2 Hoyt has some close to that but not quite there yet,imo.

I dont' know the answer, but the top target shooters seem to all shoot longer ATA bows, of varying brace heights. I'm sure both play a factor, as well as the amount of reflex. I doubt brace height is as important as the length of your power stroke. On a short draw length archer, the low brace height is not likely to be much of a problem.

From my experience ........ATA is more critical ! Brace height is just over rated to me !! I'm sure riser designs are very significant .........I just haven't got much experience testing different styles..........3 of my last 4 bows all have had nearly identical riser designs ..........but all with different ATA's and BH !!