500 fps

I think the parallel limb design has more to do with the bows rection after the shot and minimizes recoil due to the limbs rebounding in almost equal and opposite directions.

Rangeball, for what it's worth I talked to someone who has shot the Eliminator cam and he told me it ramps up early and peaks quickly.

Pinwheel 12

500fps is correct in regards to the parallel limbs---has nothing to do with FDC, but rather recoil at the shot. With parallel limbs it all goes out the end of the bow, rather than throwing it all forward. This design was developed due to the "kick" associated with cam systems that are not symmetrical, and where limbtip travel was greater in one limb due to it. Manufacturers needed a way to staunch the "kick", and parrallel design helped immensely. Now it is being used on various cam designs, even those that ARE symmetrical, and parallel design is now also moving forward to new technology such as "parabolic", which retains a secure limb pocket angle, and curves the limb (instead of being simply straight) so at full draw they are perfectly flat. This also enhances recoil reduction. Merlin and now Jennings are using this newer technology. Soon many others will follow because it works very well.

Buckfevr

Okay maybe I'm not phrasing the question correctly. Take the Outback or the Liberty. Both have a very smooth perceived draw. On both it seems like you are drawing a ligther bow, yet both are producing quite respectable power, certainly more than what the perceived effort would suggest you would get. That power has to come from somewhere. I'm just wondering if there is a greater prestress to the limbs so that you're starting at a higher point on the FDC so that there is less of a ramp up to peak and since you're starting higher on the FDC, the more gradual ramp up required from a higher starting point is what makes it seem like you are doing less to get to full draw. The energy has to come from somewhere, if it's not coming from the energy we're putting into it to get to full draw, where is it coming from?

Pinwheel 12

It's all relative to the actual FDC. A Liberty or outback is smoother on the draw due to the radius of the cam and cable track on each, which is far rounder than that of their other models which incorporate a much more radical cam, stiffer draw, and thus exhibit more speed. The Parker EZ-draw vs the Phoenix is another good comparason built on the same riser. I think what you are asking is where they get their power and speed, and actually it comes directly from the FDC and amount of energy stored in the limbs, just like any other system. Remember that these bows are much slower than their radical-cam cousins, and this is another direct comparason of differing FDC's. Parallel designs, as all designs, have constant limb deflection ratings and therefore should not be prestresed past their recommended range as they would then have a much higher percentage-of-failure rate. Unfortunately Mathews gets just this with their fixed roller-cableguard systems---the cables do not move forward and back as conventional cableguard systems allow, and thus puts more stress on the limbs during the draw. If you disconnect the cables and weigh a mathews with rollerguard, it will be almost 9 lbs difference from when the cables are strung. In essence they are using 60lb limbs on a 70 lb bow, and in this case they can get a bit faster speed because 60lb limbs are lighter and have a faster recovery rate than a set of 70's.

Savage systems offers an aftermarket cableguard system that does pretty much the same thing on bows that do not have a stationary roller cableguard, and speed gains average about 8-10 fps.

These are the only ways I know where prestressing is utilized, and I do not know if the parameters of limb deflection are such that is is a "good" thing to do, or that one should immediately install the aftermarket accessory. Only the individual factories and their design techs can tell you that. Good shooting, Pinwheel 12

Buckfevr

Pinwheel,
Thanks for the explanation. Actually I had forgotten but you had discussed this when the Legacy first came out. Good observation!!!

Rangeball

I got a chance to shoot an X-Tec over the weekend.

I'm in the camp of kind of liking the Tec riser, always thought it looked kind of cool. I had drawn a Hoyt with Cam.5 before, but never shot one. Here's my impressions-

1- Quality- The bow is built superbly, everything seems real tight, fit and finish are outstanding. I really like the looks of the bow, especially the carbon limbs.

2- Performance- Bow was set at 70#s, and due to what felt like hitting peak later in the FDC, seemed to require more effort to get it back. Bow seemed to draw like one that provides much higher energy output but "only" IBOs at 310, comparable to bows that seem much easier to draw. Wall felt solid enough, and bow held like a rock at full draw, even if it was 1.5-2" too long for me (was set at 28.5" supposedly, but had a long loop and the guys release was adjusted long). I loved the grip and the way the Tec riser seemed to anchor the bow in my hand identically each time I drew it. Release felt good, pretty much vibe free and quiet, hard to judge recoil due to draw length too long and I was pretty well stretched out.

Just found this FDC graph on the Hoyt site-



Frankly, I'm shocked. For that long of a dwell at peak, I would expect much more energy output than the 300 IBO they state. Not sure what the "problem" is, but for that energy level I'll look elsewhere for a much easier FDC...