I have not used them either so I cannot really comment negatively on them. However, I am curious as to how they work exactly. As some of the others mentioned, surface area has always been preached as being very important for arrow flight stability. A shorter, smaller surface area such as the one found on the turbonock would seem to fly in the face of this. Is there some reason why the design itself would counteract the negative effects of the smaller surface area?

What most people do not understand about the TURBO is that it is not just another gimmick , but rather a new technology of arrow flight.
Every arrow ever made since the dawn of time uses vanes or feathers and only wind resistance to stabilize its flight. WHY??????
About 200 years ago rifling was accidentally invented for bullets and bullets are way more accurate than fletched arrows. WHY??????

The faster an object spins the more resistant to change in direction it becomes. This is why gyroscopes can balance.

The TURBO NOCK instantly spins the arrow from the bowstring with its twisted nock, in the same manner that a bullet is spun from a gun barrel.
The TURBO only needs enough vane area to keep the arrow spinning,and can fly broadheads with 80% less vane than conventional fletching.
This gives tighter groups , less wind drift, flatter trajectory, better penetration.
To stabilize a fixed blade broadhead , like a Muzzy four blade 100 grain , you need three five inch vanes. This is about 7square inches of vane.
The TURBO does the same job (better) with only 1.6 square inch of vane.

<<< Willing to be an unbiased tester.

Sounds great - send me a set to test against using my arrows.
I'll post results here for everyone to see.

I'm sure you've done more scientific studies but these guys here don't believe anything until they prove it themselves. All sorts of great testing is done regularly from this forum!

One question I would have is - will it still allow easy pass thrus on deer?