WB; not accurate?
01-22-2008, 09:59 PM
#132
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,716
RE: WB; not accurate?
Wash - I agree. But, in order to "convince" anyone that the biscuit can shoot arrow-for-arrow with a top-end dropaway, it will take a statistically significant set of data - collected under fair conditions. I'm thinking something indoors - keeping score. Something we can put in numerical terms and arrive at a definite conclusion.
But I'm with ya - you'd have a hard time convincing me that the biscuit is THAT much less accurate than the latest and greatest dropaway.
I'll never know, b/c I'm not taking my biscuit off until somebody proves to me that it really is more inaccurate than the competitors. But, if somebody can convince me...I'm definitely receptive to the idea.
But I'm with ya - you'd have a hard time convincing me that the biscuit is THAT much less accurate than the latest and greatest dropaway.
I'll never know, b/c I'm not taking my biscuit off until somebody proves to me that it really is more inaccurate than the competitors. But, if somebody can convince me...I'm definitely receptive to the idea.
01-22-2008, 09:59 PM
#133
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
RE: WB; not accurate?
The wb isn't measurably less accurate,they are measureably less forgiving imo.
I am not buying one to test it.Anyone that has one,purposely torque the grip and see how the poi is affected and then do the same with a prong style or whatever and see how it stacks up.IMO,the dropped arm shot would also be worse with the wb and I KNOW they are not as easy to tune PROPERLY.I have done that one more than a few times.
BUT,that has little to do with accuracy and imo,it is a fine hunting rest if that is what you want to use.But it isn't for me.
I am not buying one to test it.Anyone that has one,purposely torque the grip and see how the poi is affected and then do the same with a prong style or whatever and see how it stacks up.IMO,the dropped arm shot would also be worse with the wb and I KNOW they are not as easy to tune PROPERLY.I have done that one more than a few times.
BUT,that has little to do with accuracy and imo,it is a fine hunting rest if that is what you want to use.But it isn't for me.
01-22-2008, 10:02 PM
#134
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 4,668
RE: WB; not accurate?
ORIGINAL: Washington Hunter
Atlas - Because you're prone to being argumentative, as is Jeff I suppose. I take it back. Both of your posts can be taken that way. Now can we agree to disagree?
Atlas - Because you're prone to being argumentative, as is Jeff I suppose. I take it back. Both of your posts can be taken that way. Now can we agree to disagree?
Quick - I thought that was what I was doing here, in a sense.
Me too..........as good an "experiment"as you could get given the circumstances.
01-22-2008, 10:03 PM
#135
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 6,006
RE: WB; not accurate?
I gotcha, Quick.
TFOX - When you say tune properly... You mean get a good hole through paper with both a field point and broadhead, correct? I've always had awesome luck paper tuning the WB. Is there something you're meaning that I'm not picking up here?
TFOX - When you say tune properly... You mean get a good hole through paper with both a field point and broadhead, correct? I've always had awesome luck paper tuning the WB. Is there something you're meaning that I'm not picking up here?
01-22-2008, 10:06 PM
#136
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 4,668
RE: WB; not accurate?
ORIGINAL: quiksilver
Wash - I agree. But, in order to "convince" anyone that the biscuit can shoot arrow-for-arrow with a top-end dropaway, it will take a statistically significant set of data - collected under fair conditions. I'm thinking something indoors - keeping score. Something we can put in numerical terms and arrive at a definite conclusion.
But I'm with ya - you'd have a hard time convincing me that the biscuit is THAT much less accurate than the latest and greatest dropaway.
I'll never know, b/c I'm not taking my biscuit off until somebody proves to me that it really is more inaccurate than the competitors. But, if somebody can convince me...I'm definitely receptive to the idea.
Wash - I agree. But, in order to "convince" anyone that the biscuit can shoot arrow-for-arrow with a top-end dropaway, it will take a statistically significant set of data - collected under fair conditions. I'm thinking something indoors - keeping score. Something we can put in numerical terms and arrive at a definite conclusion.
But I'm with ya - you'd have a hard time convincing me that the biscuit is THAT much less accurate than the latest and greatest dropaway.
I'll never know, b/c I'm not taking my biscuit off until somebody proves to me that it really is more inaccurate than the competitors. But, if somebody can convince me...I'm definitely receptive to the idea.
I don'tthink you could prove that about any piece of equipment with a person shooting it.......especially over a short time..........way too subjective.
The guywinning at Vegas with it would be the cleanest example I guess........an example of "It's not the rest........It's the shooter".
01-22-2008, 10:07 PM
#137
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: HENDERSON KY USA
Posts: 6,634
RE: WB; not accurate?
ORIGINAL: Washington Hunter
I gotcha, Quick.
TFOX - When you say tune properly... You mean get a good hole through paper with both a field point and broadhead, correct? I've always had awesome luck paper tuning the WB. Is there something you're meaning that I'm not picking up here?
I gotcha, Quick.
TFOX - When you say tune properly... You mean get a good hole through paper with both a field point and broadhead, correct? I've always had awesome luck paper tuning the WB. Is there something you're meaning that I'm not picking up here?
I have actually found them very hard to not have a tail high tear with the arrow set level on a bow with level nock travel.IMO,the bristles are entirley too stiff and the bristles manipulate the arrows path too much.
01-22-2008, 10:10 PM
#138
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 5,716
RE: WB; not accurate?
Actually... Even if I knew that the WB wasproven to beless accurate, less forgiving and whatnot, I'd probably keep it on there anyway,just to torment the masses here on HNI.
The Kingstrives to have the most offensive hunting setup on Huntingnet. The whisker biscuit isthe crown jewel ofthe King's scepter.
I still think we need an official test. It's late January - a perfect time for such pointless endeavors.
The Kingstrives to have the most offensive hunting setup on Huntingnet. The whisker biscuit isthe crown jewel ofthe King's scepter.
I still think we need an official test. It's late January - a perfect time for such pointless endeavors.
01-22-2008, 10:11 PM
#139
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: NY
Posts: 4,668
RE: WB; not accurate?
ORIGINAL: TFOX
The wb isn't measurably less accurate,they are measureably less forgiving imo.
I am not buying one to test it.Anyone that has one,purposely torque the grip and see how the poi is affected and then do the same with a prong style or whatever and see how it stacks up.IMO,the dropped arm shot would also be worse with the wb and I KNOW they are not as easy to tune PROPERLY.I have done that one more than a few times.
BUT,that has little to do with accuracy and imo,it is a fine hunting rest if that is what you want to use.But it isn't for me.
The wb isn't measurably less accurate,they are measureably less forgiving imo.
I am not buying one to test it.Anyone that has one,purposely torque the grip and see how the poi is affected and then do the same with a prong style or whatever and see how it stacks up.IMO,the dropped arm shot would also be worse with the wb and I KNOW they are not as easy to tune PROPERLY.I have done that one more than a few times.
BUT,that has little to do with accuracy and imo,it is a fine hunting rest if that is what you want to use.But it isn't for me.
I have torqued as crazy as possible out of boredom and saw misses but nothing dramatic (probably a foot or so). I just started a thread on this (How bad are your misses??) I can strangle my bow grip and still be right around the 10 ring consistently.
I have also found mine to be quite easy to tune and stay there........I guess I am lucky.
01-22-2008, 10:12 PM
#140
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 6,006
RE: WB; not accurate?
ORIGINAL: TFOX
te
Getting that good paper tear with the proper spined arrow,proper centershot,and after walk back and group tuning along with broadhead tuning thrown in for good measure.
I have actually found them very hard to not have a tail high tear with the arrow set level on a bow with level nock travel.IMO,the bristles are entirley too stiff and the bristles manipulate the arrows path too much.
ORIGINAL: Washington Hunter
I gotcha, Quick.
TFOX - When you say tune properly... You mean get a good hole through paper with both a field point and broadhead, correct? I've always had awesome luck paper tuning the WB. Is there something you're meaning that I'm not picking up here?
I gotcha, Quick.
TFOX - When you say tune properly... You mean get a good hole through paper with both a field point and broadhead, correct? I've always had awesome luck paper tuning the WB. Is there something you're meaning that I'm not picking up here?
Getting that good paper tear with the proper spined arrow,proper centershot,and after walk back and group tuning along with broadhead tuning thrown in for good measure.
I have actually found them very hard to not have a tail high tear with the arrow set level on a bow with level nock travel.IMO,the bristles are entirley too stiff and the bristles manipulate the arrows path too much.