Level nock travel?
01-10-2002, 07:41 AM
#1
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,994
Level nock travel?
Another question prodded from the Darton bow report thread- Jeff says the CPS system gives you level nock travel. Since Darton advertises it as most others don't, I assume the majority of single cam bows have "unlevel" nock travel. How unlevel, on average? Does this present a big problem?
01-10-2002, 07:56 AM
#2
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kenosha, Wi USA
Posts: 499
RE: Level nock travel?
Range-
Other bow companies will advertise "even nock travel" or "straight" or something to that effect. There's a difference between even and level. And Darton is the only one who can provide even AND level nock travel from a one-cam (or hybrid one-cam).
EVEN nock travel could be in a straight line, but not level- meaning no perependicular to the vertical mount of the bow. That means that as the arrow is moving forward, the back end of the arrow may be rising or falling depending on the cam configuration.
I'm sure you've heard stories of how some people have trouble getting a decent paper tear from some one-cams. They need to have a really high nock-point to accomplish this. Possibly could be from a weird nock travel pattern as the arrow travels forward.
An Apple Tuning machine will draw out nock travel patterns- I know Len has one and has played with various bows on it. I have some pics of graphs from a few bows that were put on the Apple machine- I'll see if I can dig them up and post them so you can see some of the wild patterns.
A two cam can be timed so that both cams are rolling over in sync, thereby providing level nock travel.
Edited by - Black Frog on 01/10/2002 08:58:14
Other bow companies will advertise "even nock travel" or "straight" or something to that effect. There's a difference between even and level. And Darton is the only one who can provide even AND level nock travel from a one-cam (or hybrid one-cam).
EVEN nock travel could be in a straight line, but not level- meaning no perependicular to the vertical mount of the bow. That means that as the arrow is moving forward, the back end of the arrow may be rising or falling depending on the cam configuration.
I'm sure you've heard stories of how some people have trouble getting a decent paper tear from some one-cams. They need to have a really high nock-point to accomplish this. Possibly could be from a weird nock travel pattern as the arrow travels forward.
An Apple Tuning machine will draw out nock travel patterns- I know Len has one and has played with various bows on it. I have some pics of graphs from a few bows that were put on the Apple machine- I'll see if I can dig them up and post them so you can see some of the wild patterns.
A two cam can be timed so that both cams are rolling over in sync, thereby providing level nock travel.
Edited by - Black Frog on 01/10/2002 08:58:14
01-10-2002, 08:55 AM
#3
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: .. NH USA
Posts: 970
RE: Level nock travel?
Most solos have between 1/4-3/8" dip in their nock travel at launch,(contrary to the hype) therefore demanding stiffer-spined arrows. There has been alot of debate surrounding the accuracy differential of this vs. level and even nock travel also. The overall design of twins allows for a much more detailed tuning procedure, and can be "supertuned" to help eliminate shooter error of creeping, as well as allow a more consistent nock travel. We then have to assume that if this is effective on a twin, then a solocam design with some of the same attributes will also have noticeable benefits. Unfortunately conventional solos do not carry these benefits. Dartons CPS system is a "hybrid" solocam, and utilizes it's own design which incorporates much better tuning qualities than any conventional solocam design. This is why I've stated many times that I feel the solocams will eventually evolve more towards a "hybrid" design as opposed to continuing on with the conventional design, which IMO has just about run it's course. Once the public realizes this and stops spending mucho money on the conventional solo designs, the manufacturers will then get on to building a better product. But they won't do it until the well is starting to run dry. Just my own thoughts, P12
01-10-2002, 09:16 AM
#4
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Oakland City Indiana USA
Posts: 524
RE: Level nock travel?
I shoot Pearson. They advertise Perfect Horizontal Delivery, and the cam on my bow is a PhD. Has anyone had one of these on one of thier machines. I'd be interested to know if nock travel is truely perfect or they are in fact liers 
.
The only thing I noticed in papertuning my Diamondback was a tail left (I think) which I'd guess was probably a result of string feed from the cam not being continuously inline with it's track in the idler. As you draw the bow the string track moves from left to right on the cam.
Anyone?
.The only thing I noticed in papertuning my Diamondback was a tail left (I think) which I'd guess was probably a result of string feed from the cam not being continuously inline with it's track in the idler. As you draw the bow the string track moves from left to right on the cam.
Anyone?
01-10-2002, 01:10 PM
#6
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 520
RE: Level nock travel?
I see three things:
Level nock, means to me the nock follows a line perpendicular to the string at rest position - Who cares? Obviously if it was really angled it would be a problem, but a degree or two has been with us ever since cavemen tried not to bang their nuckles with the arrows from stickbows.
Straight line, means the nock point doesn't rise and fall, or S curve. This may not matter, but neither does it sound like an advantage to have an S curving arrow.
Angled, the nock moves in a straight line, but it isn't square to the string at rest. Should work as well as Level Nock.
I respectfuly don't discount the posibility that one or the other configuration may result in a higher spine requirement. But i will ignore that possibility until they start to put a different collum for that effect on the Easton chart. {
}
I have said before that this whole issue was invented to get traction on Mathews at a time when they were a rapidly rising company because of their single cam. Of course this involves imputing motives, so I can't know. What I do know is I had been shooting single cams for a few years thinking they were great, when all of a sudden there were ads all over the place saying they didn't work. They call it cognative disonance.
The only thing I wonder about CPS is the degree to which it re-invents so called dual cam problem (which I admit may be nonsense also). Whenever I see the CPS system on the rack, my first reaction is "great, a dual cam". It just seems that the system would reintroduce the very timing "problems" the Single cam system was designed to eliminate (Is this the case?). So why bother for a nonexistent nock travel problem?
Good to see the NA guys didn't buy the CPS system the way they did with the S cam. I can just see darton folks with a perimeter weighted CPS or a zircon encrusted one in the wings ready to blow NA out of the water.
Level nock, means to me the nock follows a line perpendicular to the string at rest position - Who cares? Obviously if it was really angled it would be a problem, but a degree or two has been with us ever since cavemen tried not to bang their nuckles with the arrows from stickbows.
Straight line, means the nock point doesn't rise and fall, or S curve. This may not matter, but neither does it sound like an advantage to have an S curving arrow.
Angled, the nock moves in a straight line, but it isn't square to the string at rest. Should work as well as Level Nock.
I respectfuly don't discount the posibility that one or the other configuration may result in a higher spine requirement. But i will ignore that possibility until they start to put a different collum for that effect on the Easton chart. {
}I have said before that this whole issue was invented to get traction on Mathews at a time when they were a rapidly rising company because of their single cam. Of course this involves imputing motives, so I can't know. What I do know is I had been shooting single cams for a few years thinking they were great, when all of a sudden there were ads all over the place saying they didn't work. They call it cognative disonance.
The only thing I wonder about CPS is the degree to which it re-invents so called dual cam problem (which I admit may be nonsense also). Whenever I see the CPS system on the rack, my first reaction is "great, a dual cam". It just seems that the system would reintroduce the very timing "problems" the Single cam system was designed to eliminate (Is this the case?). So why bother for a nonexistent nock travel problem?
Good to see the NA guys didn't buy the CPS system the way they did with the S cam. I can just see darton folks with a perimeter weighted CPS or a zircon encrusted one in the wings ready to blow NA out of the water.
01-10-2002, 02:59 PM
#7
Fork Horn
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Kenosha, Wi USA
Posts: 499
RE: Level nock travel?
Range-
I'm afraid I must have erased those pics a year ago. A gentleman named Bill who went by the handle "WLS" owned a Apple tuning machine and emailed me pics of 4 different bow's nock travel charts. If Len may happen to know this individual's email address, please email it to me.
But is was very enlightening to see some of the wild nock travel patters of some harsh one-cam bows. There was almost an inch of up/down travel to one of the bows!
In my opinion, the most stable and consistent setup will give the most accurate results. That means that a bow that can direct all of the limb energy transfer to the rear of the arrow and send it straight forward has the best chance of being the most stable and consistent. If the rear of the arrow (nock travel pattern) is going up,down, or a combination of the two- it will not have all the energy applied to the rear of the arrow in a straight ahead launch. Granted, some of this effect may be very slight- but I look for all the help I can get to make me more accurate.
I'm afraid I must have erased those pics a year ago. A gentleman named Bill who went by the handle "WLS" owned a Apple tuning machine and emailed me pics of 4 different bow's nock travel charts. If Len may happen to know this individual's email address, please email it to me.
But is was very enlightening to see some of the wild nock travel patters of some harsh one-cam bows. There was almost an inch of up/down travel to one of the bows!
In my opinion, the most stable and consistent setup will give the most accurate results. That means that a bow that can direct all of the limb energy transfer to the rear of the arrow and send it straight forward has the best chance of being the most stable and consistent. If the rear of the arrow (nock travel pattern) is going up,down, or a combination of the two- it will not have all the energy applied to the rear of the arrow in a straight ahead launch. Granted, some of this effect may be very slight- but I look for all the help I can get to make me more accurate.
01-10-2002, 03:05 PM
#8
Nontypical Buck
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,994
RE: Level nock travel?
Thanks anyway BF. I emailed Bowtech to see what the nock travel of the Mighty Mite is, as my Hornet is it's clone... I'll post their response once I get it. I had also asked about their new Infinity cam...
01-10-2002, 03:11 PM
#9
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Baltimore Maryland USA
Posts: 1,385
RE: Level nock travel?
Ossage: I certainly do invite you to stop by some time so that I can show you graphically the history of nock travel. Your anonymity keeps me from knowing in which part of the country you reside; so I can only hope that you're close enough to visit some day.
Some of the earlier single cams had as much as 1/2" variance. Put that on a weak spine or even a bad nock and try to tune it. Over the years they have improved the designs a lot which has made them much better but nowhere near perfect.
If the "whole issue was invented", then why did manufacturers strive to make it better?? If the nock travel were not an issue, then why did they deny the problem for so many years and then come out with a "straightline" cam (not level) that proved to be so much better. There was also denial that shock was an issue but the perimeter weight surely corrected a problem that didn't exist.
Nock travel, as it exists on most single cams today, isn't necessarily the problematic issue that it was years ago; but, it is still an issue that seems to be addressed frequently by those who understand the positives and negatives of a finely tuned system. Easton, or any other arrow manufacturer, could not add " a different column for that effect" because the effect is too variable given the variety of cams and wheels.
"The only thing I wonder about CPS is the degree to which it re-invents so called dual cam problem (which I admit may be nonsense also). Whenever I see the CPS system on the rack, my first reaction is "great, a dual cam"." First, the C/P/S is not a dual cam. It does not have a dual yoke cable system. It you take the time to compare the string/cable layout of the C/P/S verses any other single cam on the market, you'll notice that they're the same. The difference is basically a split string utilizing a dual track idler. This is exactly what Hoyt just introduced for two new single cams for 2002. BTW, I've checked these new Hoyt single cams and they look very good. Not staight, but closer than many others. Again, if you're in the area, stop by and I'd be glad to show you.
"It just seems that the system would reintroduce the very timing "problems" the Single cam system was designed to eliminate (Is this the case?)." The timing problems exist on ALL single cams. The cam synchronization problems, which are extremely easy to maintain with today's technology, is what is most often confused with timing because, for so long, many used the terminology incorrectly.
"So why bother for a nonexistent nock travel problem?" If it's "nonexistent", then why the advertising of "straightline"????
Some of the earlier single cams had as much as 1/2" variance. Put that on a weak spine or even a bad nock and try to tune it. Over the years they have improved the designs a lot which has made them much better but nowhere near perfect.
If the "whole issue was invented", then why did manufacturers strive to make it better?? If the nock travel were not an issue, then why did they deny the problem for so many years and then come out with a "straightline" cam (not level) that proved to be so much better. There was also denial that shock was an issue but the perimeter weight surely corrected a problem that didn't exist.
Nock travel, as it exists on most single cams today, isn't necessarily the problematic issue that it was years ago; but, it is still an issue that seems to be addressed frequently by those who understand the positives and negatives of a finely tuned system. Easton, or any other arrow manufacturer, could not add " a different column for that effect" because the effect is too variable given the variety of cams and wheels.
"The only thing I wonder about CPS is the degree to which it re-invents so called dual cam problem (which I admit may be nonsense also). Whenever I see the CPS system on the rack, my first reaction is "great, a dual cam"." First, the C/P/S is not a dual cam. It does not have a dual yoke cable system. It you take the time to compare the string/cable layout of the C/P/S verses any other single cam on the market, you'll notice that they're the same. The difference is basically a split string utilizing a dual track idler. This is exactly what Hoyt just introduced for two new single cams for 2002. BTW, I've checked these new Hoyt single cams and they look very good. Not staight, but closer than many others. Again, if you're in the area, stop by and I'd be glad to show you.
"It just seems that the system would reintroduce the very timing "problems" the Single cam system was designed to eliminate (Is this the case?)." The timing problems exist on ALL single cams. The cam synchronization problems, which are extremely easy to maintain with today's technology, is what is most often confused with timing because, for so long, many used the terminology incorrectly.
"So why bother for a nonexistent nock travel problem?" If it's "nonexistent", then why the advertising of "straightline"????
01-10-2002, 03:30 PM
#10
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Illinois
Posts: 9
RE: Level nock travel?
AccuRest bows have perfectly straight and perfectly level nock travel. It increases the speed of the bow 10 FPS IBO, is smoother and more accurate. Does not need heavy log type arrows to get straight arrow flight.