guy at work today gave me a black widow catalog today and they have a formula for determining spine for arrows. I used it for my Chek-mate Hunter II, 54@28, and it said I needed a spine in the 90's. Anybody know how accurate this thing works for the widows? I know some of those widows are fast, but do they need that stiff of a spine?

A bow that has the riser cut past center (like most recurves now days) will allow you to go way heavy in spine, but you don't have to. Black Widows are not slowpokes by any means, but they are not much if any faster than most of the bows made today--several bows are faster than BW's. JRW did some head-to-head shooting and his Hunter II was neck in neck as far as speed with a BW. A Palmer he shot was faster. I have a Hunter I that likes 75-85# spine (believe I am pulling around 60# on it) with a dacron string. However, my 105-110# spine cedars fly pretty good out of it too (actually a little nock left, indicating low spine!). I've shot several BW bows over the years, and I have yet to see one that requires you go outrageously high in spine to get good arrow flight. BW makes a good bow, but that spine chart is a bunch of hype in my opinion.

Chad

Edited by - LBR on 01/05/2002 08:56:21

I should apologize for my last post--I should have worded it different. If you bareshaft, then the BW chart should be close if not on the money. Should be close for most any other bow that has the riser cut past center too. You should be able to shoot an arrow that is well below the spine that bare-shafts though.

Chad

I've found that their chart is pretty much right on the money for ANY "high-performance" recurve with a FF-type string. I've shot bows a lot faster than Widows, and some a lot slower.

Remember, your release will have a lot to do with what spine arrow you will need. No two archers are alike, so there are no "hard & fast" rules. What I recomend is to start out with the "average" recomended shaft & leave it long. You can then fine tune by using different weight tips and slowly shortening as needed.

JRW

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote<font size=1 face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>JRW did some head-to-head shooting and his Hunter II was neck in neck as far as speed with a BW. A Palmer he shot was faster. <hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face='Verdana, Arial, Helvetica' size=2 id=quote>

Was that an &quot;apples to apples&quot; comparison? Same weight bows/same weight arrows? I remember that post, but can't recall the details or get the site search engine to work. Anyhow, I know a few ppl that have had very different results when comparing the same two bow brands. Nevertheless, Chek-mates are fine bows & will easily stand on their own merits w/out negative comments about others.

Man, to think I went to recurves to simplify things. How the heck do I figure out what spine I need without buying 30 different arrows? Learned I can't trust the easton charts to much. Both 2018's, 2114's (at 29&quot; or so) shoot well out of my bow. 2016's at 28&quot; shot well too. A 5575 Gold tip at 28&quot;-29&quot; shot well also. 2315 at 29.5&quot; shot terrible (I knew that was going to happen). 2219's at 31&quot; shot well, but the were flu-flu's, so I toss that out. I guess I need about a 65-70 spine. I want some graphlex or fiberglass shafts as soon as I can find them. Long story, but they seem ideal for me. I guess I kinda anwered my own question.

Vic,

I found the info on the other thread (page 20). You're right...it wasn't completely &quot;apples to apples&quot;. The arrows on the CM were 31/100 of a grain per pound lighter. The Widow's string was 2 strands less. The CM outshot the Widow by 3 fps, but with the very slightly lighter arrows (relative to draw weight) I figured them as &quot;neck & neck&quot;. Here it is.......

New Chek-Mate Hunter II, deflex riser, Coco riser, Yew limbs, 62&quot;, 62# @ 31&quot; (reweighed it on two different scales), braced at 8 1/2&quot;. 14 strand Dyna97 endless string, two 1/2 pairs of catwhisker silencers, Flipper II rest. Arrows are 32 1/2&quot; Beman ICS Camo Hunters, four 4&quot; feathers, 125 grain points, total arrow weight 500 grians (thought they were 490, reweighed when I got home) (8.06 grains/pound).

Black Widow SAIII (new design), deflex riser, actionwood riser & limbs, 62&quot;, 52# @ 31&quot;, braced 8 1/2&quot;. 12 strand endless dyna string, two 1/2 pairs of catwhiskers, Flipper II rest. Arrows are 32 1/4&quot; Gold Tip Hunter 7595, 100 grain points, total weight 435 grains (8.37 grains/pound)

Also tested was an older Palmer Classic, straight riser, actionwood riser and limbs, 60&quot;, 63# @ 31&quot;, Fast Flight string (unknown # of strands), beaver ball silencers, shot off the shelf with a rug rest. Arrows used were 500 grain carbons for the above Chek-Mate.

All shots through the chronograph were done at about 7 feet.

Chek-Mate average speed: 208 fps. Kenetic energy: 48.05 foot pounds (can you say &quot;dead bear&quot;?)

Black Widow average speed (results from previous shooting with the same chronograph at the same distance): 205 fps. Kenetic energy: 40.60 foot pounds

Palmer average speed: 214 fps. Kinetic energy: 50.86 foot pounds (HOLY CRAP!)

After taking into account the fact that the arrows for the Black Widow were slightly heavier with respect to grains/pound, I figure they shoot the same relative speed.

The total shock was the Palmer, which outshot the Chek-Mate by six fps. That bow is a flat-out speed-demon. Not only that, but it was shot off the shelf too. Granted, it's got a straight riser, which will shoot a little faster, but not THAT much faster.

JRW

Edited by - jrw on 01/05/2002 23:36:43

Vic,

I just reread your post again and didn't want you thinking that I was beating up on Widows or anything.

I got rid of mine because it just didn't turn out to be the right bow for me. Wasn't the bow's fault...we just weren't a good &quot;match&quot;. As a matter of fact, I still think their SA's & MA's are the single most bomb-proof riser around and have one of the toughest finishes on the market.

Like I said, they're good bows. But like anything, there's no one &quot;perfect&quot; bow for everybody. What works for me might make the next guy want to break out the gas and a match.

JRW

Same here Vic--obviously they are a good bow, and have withstood the test of time. I know a lot of folks believe in bare shaft testing, but the more I dig into it the more I question it. Where the heck are we gonna find cedar arrows spined at 150#??? I really don't understand it, but I am trying. I didn't mean to slam BW bows at all--just have my doubts about the spine chart.

As for comparisons, you know as well (probably better) as me that you can get different results with the same brands depending on who is shooting them. Neither one is the fastest bow on the market, but either of them will do the trick if the nut behind it does his job. I think Jason pretty well covered it. Sorry I came across the wrong way.

Chad

Well, sorry I came off so strong, there was no need for that. Guess I've become &quot;oversensitized&quot; to widow bashing. <img src=icon_smile_blackeye.gif border=0 align=middle> Hehehe. Jason, whew-wee! That gorilla draw really eeks out the performance from recurve limbs doesn't it! <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> I've done a little testing w/my 51# @ 30&quot; SA & my 60# @ 30&quot; HunterII & didn't get nearly those speeds. But I was using a much heavier arrow (same one for both bows, a 72# tapered cedar) & a shorter 30&quot; draw. The CM shot 3 fps faster (179 vs 182 fps) on average. Not nearly as scientific a test as yours, but sure told me what I suspected after previously shooting the CM a few times. Y'all are right; either will do the trick & no one bow is for everyone that's for sure. <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>