2 Cams vs 1 Cam
03-19-2003, 08:16 PM
#3
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ks.
Posts: 87
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
Im a one cam guy so Ill start.
One cam
1----Solid back wall. Easier to find a repeatable anchor.
2----Usually quieter overall.
3----I think their easier to tune and keep in time. If you use a quality string and power cable,take care of them and maintain them,the extra string length and stretch is a moot point.
4----From my experience shooting both, ones are less hand shocky overall and theres less felt recoil at release.
Now the training wheel guys can get on and talk about supertuning, more speed, tiller tuning, perfectly level nock travel, less agressive draw cycles, and all the other mystical stuff. I think they both have benefits and missgivings. Its more a personal thing. Twos seem to dominate indoor, and ones 3D.Then again singles have won Vegas, and twos have won in 3D. Once again it depends more on the indian, and less the bow.
One cam
1----Solid back wall. Easier to find a repeatable anchor.
2----Usually quieter overall.
3----I think their easier to tune and keep in time. If you use a quality string and power cable,take care of them and maintain them,the extra string length and stretch is a moot point.
4----From my experience shooting both, ones are less hand shocky overall and theres less felt recoil at release.
Now the training wheel guys can get on and talk about supertuning, more speed, tiller tuning, perfectly level nock travel, less agressive draw cycles, and all the other mystical stuff. I think they both have benefits and missgivings. Its more a personal thing. Twos seem to dominate indoor, and ones 3D.Then again singles have won Vegas, and twos have won in 3D. Once again it depends more on the indian, and less the bow.
03-19-2003, 09:07 PM
#4
Giant Nontypical
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Burleson TX USA
Posts: 6,455
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
do a search in the tech forum.
Pinwheel12 done an in depth report on both single and dual cams it is well worth the effort to find the report and read it.
I am a dual cam person and todays dual cams have a solid back wall you also get level nock travel which you cant get on a single cam duals are faster and with todays duals the noise and hand shock levels are about the same as the single cams.
Pinwheel12 done an in depth report on both single and dual cams it is well worth the effort to find the report and read it.
I am a dual cam person and todays dual cams have a solid back wall you also get level nock travel which you cant get on a single cam duals are faster and with todays duals the noise and hand shock levels are about the same as the single cams.
03-20-2003, 12:14 AM
#5
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,903
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
Dual cam shooter here!
Don , I would deffinately disagree with your statement ..." " easier to tune and string stretching doesn' t effect things as much"
Having been an archer for many years I' ve found the benifits of dual cam bows to exceed solo cam bows.
Without going into all the details (if you want I' ll find Pinwheels post which is very detailed) I' m only going to give you the biggest " pro" of a dual cam bow for me anyway. SHOULDER LIFE! Anyone who does ALOT of shooting will eventually succumb to the shoulder pain (sometimes requiring surgery) associated with the harsh draw cycle of a solo cam.
Don , I would deffinately disagree with your statement ..." " easier to tune and string stretching doesn' t effect things as much"
Having been an archer for many years I' ve found the benifits of dual cam bows to exceed solo cam bows.
Without going into all the details (if you want I' ll find Pinwheels post which is very detailed) I' m only going to give you the biggest " pro" of a dual cam bow for me anyway. SHOULDER LIFE! Anyone who does ALOT of shooting will eventually succumb to the shoulder pain (sometimes requiring surgery) associated with the harsh draw cycle of a solo cam.
03-20-2003, 12:19 AM
#6
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,903
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
quote:
" 1) Twin cams are faster than solos if of the same configuration. Therefore, manufacturers have made most conventional solos with a much harsher draw cycle which stores more energy in an effort to compete with the speed of the twins. This harsher draw cycle is much harder on the archers' shoulder and back muscles, especially when they " overbow" themselves with the " false sense of ease" of the 80% let-off at the end of the draw cycle. They also cannot be tuned to as fine a degree as twins simply because they have no opposing cam to " balance-out the system" . Ever get those occasional " flyers" with a conventional solo? Most everyone that shoots a conventional solo has had them at one time or another. You simply cannot tune them out with a conventional solo, they come from creeping slightly forward (most archers will from time to time) which rotates the single cam, and throws your shot. With twins you can " supertune" (what I call the creep-tune method) both cams and eliminate those high or low shots and have the same impact points regardless of creep or overdraw. In other words IMHO you have to work much harder to shoot a conventional solo with the same consistency as a finely-tuned twin, especially when being a beginning or average archer, regardless of what you " think" you feel due to the higher let-off. Try it with an open mind and see for yourselves.
2) Most conventional solos have 80% let-off to help " mask" the harsher draw cycle they exhibit as stated above. This IMO is also detrimental to an average shooters' accuracy, because the higher the let-off, the less tension that runs through the entire system, and this lesser tension allows the archer to draw the string out of it' s natural path much easier, therefore causing more left/right shots. Pros are not as apt to be bothered by this or by #1, because they know what they can safely and comfortably pull, and have superb form and shooting skills. Yes, Pros are winning with solos, but they are being paid to and are going where the money is, otherwise few would be there IMO. They also do not have any of the " form flaws" that most archers do, and thus CAN win with them. I have shot solos for quite awhile myself, but can honestly say I have never shot the scores that I do with twins. Many Pros like Dave Cousins say the difference between solos and twins and accuracy is that with the conventional solo they can keep them holding a " sloppy 10, tight 9" , but with twins they can keep them in the " tight 10, or X" . With something like 16 World Records under Daves' belt, and the input from other top archers backing twins, I think they know what they' re talking about. That same distance can be the difference between a solid double lung and a " no-man' s land" shot while hunting, or the difference between a 10 and a 12 in 3D. Another interesting fact is that most of the Pros I know that shoot the solos are running 65% modules or cams in them. Ever pull a true 65% solocam? He-he, better you than me, been there and done that, no wonder I feel old!
3) The hard-wall of the solos is now being matched by built-in " wallbangers" (stops) on alot of the twins. They are rock solid also. Moot point here.
4) Conventional Solos need to be kept in time also, contrary to the " myth" that they are virtually maintenence free. Cam rotation and nocking point height are VERY critical with them, and they can go " out" quickly with their longer string due to increased chance of slippage or stretch. This is not as much of a factor today with the better string materials/better building techiniques available, but a shorter string/cable combination is always better than a longer one regardless to take away any factor at all.(some solos admittedly now have dual-track idlers and an adjustable cam also which helps this. In other words they have two cams! Any time a cable goes to a " stop" on a eccentric, that eccentric must be counted as a power source, so technically all of these designs are in fact twins! ) This means the average Joe will be spending more time at the shop and on the range chasing sight marks on a conventional solo than a guy with a twin. I have not touched my twin in over 8 months since I switched over to new limbs for it, the cams are still perfectly on my timing marks after thousands of shots, and it hits the X every time. None of my previous conventional solos would touch that for that period of time without some diddling.
In fact, IMO the ONLY 2 things conventional solos now currently have over the twins is 1)- that out of the box, they will initially hold better. This is readily rectified in the twins during the tuning/setup process, and becomes a moot point if done correctly with proper stabilization and timing/tuning. Most new twins hold superbly anyway. And 2)-- They are quieter for the most part. Out of the box, this is a true assumption and I have no arguement. Interestingly enough, a quick and correct application of cat whiskers and limbsavers for hunting applications (who cares how loud your target bow is if it goes into the X?) will put most every quality bow made today (twin or solo) in the same class also, and is much cheaper IMHO than a doctors' bill for strained or torn muscles due to a harsher draw-force curve and the " masking" of an 80% let-off.
And again---" If they keep on upgrading the solocam, they' ll re-invent the twin cam" . I believe this statement to be more correct than not.
I don' t believe this should turn into a Ford/Chevy debate over solos/twins, but I felt that I should clarify a few issues and offer my thoughts on why I feel twins will be a better choice overall for most archers. As stated, whatever you feel comfortable with and whatever you' d like to shoot is fine with me, there are many guys shooting conventional solos out there that love them. As long as we' re all shooting, that is definately what matters most."
I think that sums it up from my standpoint. Good shooting, Pinwheel 12
" 1) Twin cams are faster than solos if of the same configuration. Therefore, manufacturers have made most conventional solos with a much harsher draw cycle which stores more energy in an effort to compete with the speed of the twins. This harsher draw cycle is much harder on the archers' shoulder and back muscles, especially when they " overbow" themselves with the " false sense of ease" of the 80% let-off at the end of the draw cycle. They also cannot be tuned to as fine a degree as twins simply because they have no opposing cam to " balance-out the system" . Ever get those occasional " flyers" with a conventional solo? Most everyone that shoots a conventional solo has had them at one time or another. You simply cannot tune them out with a conventional solo, they come from creeping slightly forward (most archers will from time to time) which rotates the single cam, and throws your shot. With twins you can " supertune" (what I call the creep-tune method) both cams and eliminate those high or low shots and have the same impact points regardless of creep or overdraw. In other words IMHO you have to work much harder to shoot a conventional solo with the same consistency as a finely-tuned twin, especially when being a beginning or average archer, regardless of what you " think" you feel due to the higher let-off. Try it with an open mind and see for yourselves.
2) Most conventional solos have 80% let-off to help " mask" the harsher draw cycle they exhibit as stated above. This IMO is also detrimental to an average shooters' accuracy, because the higher the let-off, the less tension that runs through the entire system, and this lesser tension allows the archer to draw the string out of it' s natural path much easier, therefore causing more left/right shots. Pros are not as apt to be bothered by this or by #1, because they know what they can safely and comfortably pull, and have superb form and shooting skills. Yes, Pros are winning with solos, but they are being paid to and are going where the money is, otherwise few would be there IMO. They also do not have any of the " form flaws" that most archers do, and thus CAN win with them. I have shot solos for quite awhile myself, but can honestly say I have never shot the scores that I do with twins. Many Pros like Dave Cousins say the difference between solos and twins and accuracy is that with the conventional solo they can keep them holding a " sloppy 10, tight 9" , but with twins they can keep them in the " tight 10, or X" . With something like 16 World Records under Daves' belt, and the input from other top archers backing twins, I think they know what they' re talking about. That same distance can be the difference between a solid double lung and a " no-man' s land" shot while hunting, or the difference between a 10 and a 12 in 3D. Another interesting fact is that most of the Pros I know that shoot the solos are running 65% modules or cams in them. Ever pull a true 65% solocam? He-he, better you than me, been there and done that, no wonder I feel old!
3) The hard-wall of the solos is now being matched by built-in " wallbangers" (stops) on alot of the twins. They are rock solid also. Moot point here.
4) Conventional Solos need to be kept in time also, contrary to the " myth" that they are virtually maintenence free. Cam rotation and nocking point height are VERY critical with them, and they can go " out" quickly with their longer string due to increased chance of slippage or stretch. This is not as much of a factor today with the better string materials/better building techiniques available, but a shorter string/cable combination is always better than a longer one regardless to take away any factor at all.(some solos admittedly now have dual-track idlers and an adjustable cam also which helps this. In other words they have two cams! Any time a cable goes to a " stop" on a eccentric, that eccentric must be counted as a power source, so technically all of these designs are in fact twins! ) This means the average Joe will be spending more time at the shop and on the range chasing sight marks on a conventional solo than a guy with a twin. I have not touched my twin in over 8 months since I switched over to new limbs for it, the cams are still perfectly on my timing marks after thousands of shots, and it hits the X every time. None of my previous conventional solos would touch that for that period of time without some diddling.
In fact, IMO the ONLY 2 things conventional solos now currently have over the twins is 1)- that out of the box, they will initially hold better. This is readily rectified in the twins during the tuning/setup process, and becomes a moot point if done correctly with proper stabilization and timing/tuning. Most new twins hold superbly anyway. And 2)-- They are quieter for the most part. Out of the box, this is a true assumption and I have no arguement. Interestingly enough, a quick and correct application of cat whiskers and limbsavers for hunting applications (who cares how loud your target bow is if it goes into the X?) will put most every quality bow made today (twin or solo) in the same class also, and is much cheaper IMHO than a doctors' bill for strained or torn muscles due to a harsher draw-force curve and the " masking" of an 80% let-off.
And again---" If they keep on upgrading the solocam, they' ll re-invent the twin cam" . I believe this statement to be more correct than not.
I don' t believe this should turn into a Ford/Chevy debate over solos/twins, but I felt that I should clarify a few issues and offer my thoughts on why I feel twins will be a better choice overall for most archers. As stated, whatever you feel comfortable with and whatever you' d like to shoot is fine with me, there are many guys shooting conventional solos out there that love them. As long as we' re all shooting, that is definately what matters most."
I think that sums it up from my standpoint. Good shooting, Pinwheel 12
03-20-2003, 10:31 AM
#7
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uniontown,pa
Posts: 881
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
now there is cam & 1/2 too its supposed to be more forgiving than solo cam , i' ve never shot a solo cam so i can' t comment on it but i' ve been told if you tend to creep , you' ll have trouble with a solo cam . especially if you have a short draw length ,which i do. i was going to buy a single cam hoyt this year but they came out with the new cam & a half and all of last years models were gone so i ordered a cam and a half , when i get it i' ll let you know how it is.
03-20-2003, 12:09 PM
#8
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ks.
Posts: 87
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
I cant figure out whos who. Is Bowfanatic Pinwheel. I assume so. Great response none the less. Nothing but facts. Almost makes me want to run out and buy a twin again. You know my feeling on the creeping issue. Why cover up a form flaw or mental error. Fix it. It doesnt make any more sense to me than cutting off all the fingers of your bow hand, because every once in a while you tend to regrab. As far as shoulder problems, I think most archers will eventually have some at one time or another. Doesnt matter if its a recurve or a single. I do see your point. A single is more apt to cause problems. But a twin is more likely to cause more problems than a wheely. If pain were really a concern, wed all be shooting wheelies or Oniedas. Not trying to argue Pin, just not in total agreement.
03-20-2003, 05:48 PM
#9
Nontypical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,903
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
Sorry for the confusion! The above post was written by Pinwheel12 in the Technical forum. He covers just about everything I feel about duallys -vs- solos.
Apparently he doesn' t mind typing , I do.
Apparently he doesn' t mind typing , I do.
03-20-2003, 06:41 PM
#10
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Ks.
Posts: 87
RE: 2 Cams vs 1 Cam
Aha. That explains it. I was thinking dual personalities there Bowfanatic, but that clears it up. Getting back to this thread, I wholeheartedly agree with Pinwheels and others thinking that twos can be tuned more precisely and shot to a higher level of accuracy. If I were going to shoot spots, and only spots, thats what Id shoot. I have seen Pin post that for hunting we should strive to be as accurate as possible. I of course agree with that. Point being where do you draw the line. If we were truly trying to be the best we could, wed go into the woods with our 24 inch stabilizers, out v bars,our highly micro adjustable Tox or Surelock sight bars with the four power scope, and we would only shoot with true back tension releases, and then only using perfect form. Basically for the utmost in accuracy, wed use our highly accurate target setups.Problem is that isnt realistic. Makes as much sense as using your 14 lb. 1/4" m.o.a. benchrest rifle to chase elk.You have to find a compromise that gets the job done. I guess my point being, how much less accurate is a one compared to a two overall. A quarter inch a.m.o.a. A half inch. Big deal. Anytime you set up a hunting bow its a compromise. A compromise between accuracy, ease of use, and fragility.