live2bowhunt

Are there any disadvantages to parrallel limb designs where the limbs are at 40+ degree angles to the riser? I have heard that this puts a lot of stress on the limbs at the limb pocket area which might lead to limb failures after an extended period of time.

Rangeball

I would imagine the limbs are built to handle the stress loads, but other than that possibility, I can' t think of any disadvantages...

Arthur P

The biggest disadvantage I can think of is parallel limb bows are butt-ugly.[X(][&:]

A short limb is definitely more highly stressed than a longer limb of the same strength, and it will fail sooner. But probably not one guy in ten thousand keeps a bow long enough or shoots enough to work those limbs to failure.

Rack-attack

Man your crazy

parallel limb bows look the best to me - they are beautiful

JeramyK

I too think parallel limbs are sweet looking. [8D]

Arthur P

You just now figgerin' that out, Rack? LOL

PABowhntr

There was once a time when I agreed with your statement Arthur but now.....

I think they are an acquired taste...sort of like an ugly woman.....

JOE PA

Beauty is certainly in the eye of the beholder, isn' t it?

Logically, it would seem that the VFT/parallel limb bows would be much more difficult to shoot well for a couple of reasons. First, all of the risers of such bows are highly reflexed, and should be less stable, and more prone to torque. I know that this has been discussed quite a bit over the years, reflexed v. deflexed risers, etc.

The second reason that would seem to be a possible accuracy problem is that the limbs do not really move forward much at all, compared to a more " normal" bow.
When a shorter riser/ more vertical limb bow comes from full draw to brace, the limbs move forward more, and the arrow is propelled forward (relatively) more by limb movement than by string movement. The VFT bows' limbs do not move forward much, so the arrow is propelled more by string movement than by limb movement. It would seem logical that a limb would be able to move forward with more straight-line consistency than a string, which would seem to be prone to all kinds of torque and oscillation. Again, this is just what appears to be logical.

BUT, there seem to be quite a few guys on several forums posting that bows like the Bowtech Extreme VFT and the Mathews LX, both of which have highly reflexed risers, parallel limbs (VFT) and relatively low brace heights, are shooting very well, as well as any bow that they have shot before. Maybe logic doesn' t work in this case.[]

I' m not really sure why, maybe someone can explain it better. I do know that a few years ago, I built two experimental bows that were somewhat like the Martin Kam-Act, except that they had only one limb and one cam + an idler wheel. The one I made for my kids worked OK, if it was shot with a release aid. When they (or I) tried to shoot with fingers, the string oscillation was so inconsistent that groups were terrible, even though it shot pretty well with a release. The bigger bow that I made for myself had more problems, especially with material strength, etc. I could only get about 45# out of the materials that I had at the time, and the draw length came out too long, but it was nearly impossible to get decent or consistent arrow flight with that bow that propelled the arrow totally by the string movement. It was the only bow that I have ever shot that had absolutely NO recoil, however. I really thought that the VFT type bows would be running into similar problems, counting so much on the string movement for arrow propulsion, but apparently, it is not really a problem for the engineers who know what they are doing!
[]

I don' t think there is much question that a shorter limb would be under more strain than a longer one. If you add a lot of prestress to that short limb, as Bowtech does, it would again seem logical that this would be a problem area. Since very few failures of Bowtech limbs are reported, it would seem that Kevin has engineered the bows so that what would seem to be a problem area in fact is not much of a problem at all.

I personally do not have a VFT bow, although I do have a Pro 38 Dual Cam, which borders on being able to be called VFT, since it has a long, straight riser, and limb angle that is much greater than anything else I have owned. If logic would apply, it would be much more difficult for me to shoot this bow accurately than say, the Continental Denali that I had with a deflexed riser and 9+ inch brace height. Experience has proven otherwise, at least for me. I have no explanation for this, however.

One real drawback the the VFT design is found when you but them in a bow press, at least a conventional bow press. It is much more difficult to compress the limbs on a VFT bow than a more conventional bow. It is highly recommended that you back off on the limb bolts before pressing a bow with VFT.

I guess the real advantage to them is the lack of recoil. I personally have not seen a strong connection between lack of recoil and consistent accuracy, though. I really think I can shoot my early " 90' s Darton Viper as well as any bow I have tried. Just my thoughts. Probably not worth too much, but I am bored at the moment.[&:]

btomlin

Especially when they are in the photo of a 150 class 8pter...eh...Rack[:-]

PABowhntr

Surprisingly, I have had the opposite experience. Generally speaking, when a bow exhibits less recoil I find that I am less worried about the recoil of the bow thus allowing me to maintain better shooting form. It is entirely mental in my case though I can see where this might not be an issue with others.