mobow

To an extent, yes they do. Let me attempt to explain why. When trying to get a fixed blade head to fly we go through all kinds of efforts with the bow to get it tuned properly. Then we go through all kinds of efforts to align the head with the shaft properly with NO wobble. Well, now let's do that on an arrow with looser specs. We all know an arrow flexes upon release, so if an arrow is .006 it will flex farther than one that is .001. That sounds like I worded that wrong, I don't mean it's not as stiff and will flex more, that's not what I mean.

I mean the arrow tip is already .006 below an imaginary straight line as so when it flexes it will be flexed .005 more than the other arrow at .001. That sounds insignificant, but to me it seems the fletching would have to work harder to stabilize the arrow. Maybe I'm all washed up here, but that's my thinking. I mean, we go through all this trouble to perfect everything to achieve good flight, but we started with an arrow that wasn't as straight as others anyway.

Secondly, if the specs on straightness are that "loose," what does that say for the overall quality of the arrow itself. I mean, what other specs are lacking? Make sense?

I agree that for the average archer .002 or .003 really isn't going to make much difference. In most cases where field points are concerned you may not notice it at all. But I do know one thing. When I switched from a less expensive carbon to my A/C/C my shooting immediately improved. My groups shrunk and I didn't have any "flyers." If I miss my mark now, I know why. It was something I did not an inconsistent arrow.

Sylvan

I think that makes a lot of sense! Afterall in many cases when you buy a +/- .006 you are buying "reject" arrows from a tighter tolerance. Though the manufacturer will put a different name on the shaft the arrows come from the same manufacturing process. They just sort them. An arrow that is rejected for a +- .001 may well be considered a "good" arrow in a looser spec so they simply slap a different name on the shaft and sell them (hopefully) for less money. So the question you raiseis what wasn't going quite right in the process that caused that shaft to be areject at+- .001 and could that same defect cause other problems. Like I said in my very first post regarding this, I have noticed that the cheaper carbons not only have looser straightness specs but they also seem to dispaly more variability in axial spine as well.

I think it might be interesting to point out that there is also more variability in the manufacturing processes used to produce carbon arrows than aluminum. I think pretty much, all the aluminum producers use an extrusion process. In other words, not a whole lot of difference in the "way" aluminum arrows are made. With regard to carbon though,there are several different ways each company uses to wrap the carbon fibers, glue them together and heat treat them so I guess that's a whole "nother" discussion.