wolf6151

I also disagree with Muzzyman88 that nock travel is not a big deal. People have been shooting bows accurately for a long time even with unlevel nock travel but that doesn't mean that you don't still try to improve the product while at the same time we try to improve the skill of the person shooting the bow. Archers should continue to try to improve their skills, but having straight and level nock travel would just be eliminating another factor in making bows and shooters as accurate as possible.

ijimmy

I'll have to say the first we heard of nock travel was from darton . Ten years later and 4 or 5 top bow manufactures are useing their design . That alone should tell some kind of story . Now comes along the wide spread use of fallaway arrow rests , and in my oppinion nock travel becomes an issue for all useing them . Stick a broadhead up front and every littel inconsistancy becomes a big issue .

Black Frog

Very innacurate statement there Olink. You ever talk with Norb? He writes LOTS of bow reviews, and some are not very flattering at all. The editors of BHW are the ones who DECIDE what bow review will be printed and which ones won't see the light of day. He tells it like it is (which is why he is very respected in the industry), and the editors pick and choose the reviews they want to print. You shouldn't blame Norb for that.

Arthur P

Okay, say we've got a bow that all the experts finally agree has 'straight and level nock travel.' We're take a trip into the future, say a year down the road. The bow has had a new string and cable(s) installed and has been retuned several times. Now, how in the world does Mr Average - who doesn't have any specialized testing equipment - supposed to know whether his bow still has straight and level nock travel? I guess he takes it to a shop that does have the hi-dollah equipment to get it checked and adjusted? And then he just pays the fee and takes their word for it... Hopefully the shop is staffed with reputable people that take pride in high quality service and workmanship.

And once the straight and level nock travel has been established, just how much better will the bow shoot? How many fps will it kick up? Arrow goups will be how much smaller? Bah! Not one in ten thousand archers would be able to tell the difference between a well tuned bow with halfway decent nock travel and one that has perfectly straight and level nock travel.

Sure, there are some minor hypothetical advantages to having perfect nock travel over just 'good' nock travel. And nobody wants a bow with BAD nock travel. But, like so many other very minor points that have been hyped all out of proportion in the past 10 years, when it comes to actual shooting qualities and ease of maintenance, perfect nock travel is just another shovel full of manure on the pile.

By the way, I agree about nock travel and dropaway rests. That's why I have a low opinion of dropaways.

Too many people are spending too much time and energy chasing butterflies and moonbeams. Most would find there are far greater benefits to simply spending that time and enegy on PRACTICE, and improving their shooting form and techniques.

silentassassin

Oh my God............................................... .......AthurP just said exactly what I was thinking...............and better than I could have said it myself[:-][:'(]

Pinwheel 12

Cmon, now Art, your love of longbows is showing strongly here with the comments from the "keep it simple" guy!

Technology moves forward, sometimes slowly, sometimes in big strides, and bow designs get better and better, offering more forgiveness, better materials, better designs, better accuracy. You yourself cannot deny this, having watched the evolution of the mousetraps over the years just as I have. Some theories are admittedly bunk, but not this one because Straight and Level nock travel has definitive technical merit. Any bow that offers the shooter a wider variety of spine options for easier tuning, (especially with broadheads) is quieter, smoother, and more forgiving of shooter input, is to me a better mousetrap. Maybe I'm wrong with this type of thinking, but for some reason I don't think so.....

Who knows, maybe even as soon as next year there will be something even better still coming to the forefront that we can debate.....I would think that if everyone in the various manufacturers' R&D depts are not off the couch and working hard towards releasing newer and even better products that some could quickly be left in the dust in the next year or two if they are not careful.........

Anyway-

Straight and Level nock travel IMHO will soon become a standard test within the industry much like hysteresis, IBO speeds, force-draw curves, and kinetic energy, this I am very sure of--- even tho some companies want to cover it up, others who already have it will push it through, so best for all to get with the program IMO. They will also devise a standard of testing for this soon I predict, because it really isn't all that difficult to do so..

More manure on the pile? Nah---Cannot live in denial, forever-- technology progresses, whether some want it to or not.[8D] Good shooting, Pinwheel 12

JeffB

wow lot's going on here since I've been away...

I’ve got to admit, I was a little disappointed in the nock travel of the Liberty on that Hunters Friend report. I’m not sure I like the way it was tested but it still was a fair comparison between the two bows.

That said, I think the true value of nock travel falls somewhere between the two extremes. It’s very important, but it’s not the be-all-end-all either. It certainly makes for easier tuning…especially at higher speeds with fixed blades, and it also makes shaft selection less critical.

As far as pure accuracy goes, I believe there are too many variables. There’s no doubt single-cams with their poor nock travel have won major indoor tournaments (“spots”) in the hands of some great shooters. The accuracy is there if you’ve got the form. The singles may not do as well at 70, 80, & 90 meters for field/FITA shoots, but they “work” for the 3D & indoor circuit just fine assuming a well tuned shooter and equipment.

As far as the industry goes, like Ijimmy said, you didn’t hear anything about NT ‘til Darton started talking about it in their ads for the CPS. But that didn’t seem to matter to all the other companies who started making single-cam bows in the wake of the MaxCam for 5 years. Now that Hoyt has popularized the CPS concept, and sold a ton of bows with their version (IMO, the reason being that unlike Darton they were able to make their hybrids quiet, and more comfy to shoot). I can understand why Mathews is upset..not only has Hoyt done well w/ the hybrid, but they have “dissed” everyone who makes a single-cam design in the process (and basically admitted that they themselves made a crappy design for the 6 years they built singles).. Mathews has shown that the C.5 in fact does not always show SnLNT, and that they can w/ the HP cam. It may piss people off but that’s neither here nor there…it’s mostly aggressive posturing and “my weenie is bigger than yours” syndrome from the 2 heaviest hitters in the industry.

But does it matter? That seems to be the real question. I think it does, but as I mentioned before, the answer falls somewhere in the middle. SnLNT is not going to guarantee an easy tuning, easy shooting bow except in a machine. There are many more variables that can determine the result we ultimately care about (i.e. do I shoot X bow very accurately). IME/IMO comfort and “feel” will always be the MOST important factor when the bow gets in a persons hands. If I can’t shoot bow Z that has SnLNT because the draw force curve sucks, or it’s too bouncy on the target, or the valley is too sensitive, or the wall is spongy, or the bow has so much shock/recoil that I flinch, or the grip is not comfy, or etc etc etc, then that SnLNT is not going to help me whatsoever.

So to me, I see SnLNT as a “bonus”; a NICE bonus, but a bonus nonetheless. If I can find a bow that performs the way I want, offers all the “comfort” aspects that I want and also has SnLNT then I’d be one happy SOB. Unfortunately I haven’t been able to find a bow that combines all that (yet?)..not from BowTech, not from Hoyt, not from Darton, not from Mathews, not from Merlin or Martin, or Pearson, or PSE, or HCA, or …the list goes on… So I stick w/ the performance & comfort aspects, and I try to minimize the effects of moderate to poor nock travel on my singles by using some tuning “tricks” (not really tricks per-se, just stuff I’ve learned via experience). For me, (a Hunter who also shoots a lot but doesn’t compete), the better single-cams from companies like Mathews, BowTech, PSE and a few others have more good qualities than bad.

For the vast majority of archers, SnLNT is not the thing that is holding them back from tight groups . Most of them (myself included) would be better off spending a couple hundred bucks on shooting lessons than spending the money to upgrade to a hybrid or dual cam bow from the single-cam they are shooting now.

I think Arthur did a real good job of summing it up. And I would like to address one of his comments re: dropaways and nock travel. I agree with him fully (and it’s one of my little “tricks” I was mentioning). I’ve noticed my singles shoot tighter (at least for me) when equipped with a “conventional” rest design. However, over the past 10 days or so I’ve been experimenting w/ a drop-away rest and in “head to head” competition, there is no doubt in my mind that the drop-away is not the best choice other than for fletch clearance. I’ll be going back to the conventional rest full-time.

Rangeball

Here's a link to a really long and technically informative thread on AT concerning nock travel-

http://www.archerytalk.com/vb/showth...threadid=38710

I agree with Hoggler (from AT). Of the 3 ways to measure nock travel, it seems dynamic during the actual shot is what counts.

Arthur P

Pinwheel, I don't say the theory of SnLNT is 'bunk', I'm saying it's another case of a minor advantage being overhyped until the emphasis on it is way out of proportion to it's actual benefit.

Sure, I believe in keeping it simple. Of course, I might have a different opinion if a substantial part of my income depended on the industry making bows so complicated and finicky that people HAD to bring them to me for routine maintenance, at anywhere from $75 to $125 a pop... plus cost of parts.

Not being judgemental at all, because there are plenty of people more than willing to take their bows to a mechanic (did I really say that!?![] please forgive me)... Bow Technician... and spend what it takes to keep their bow funtional. Their saying is that, since archery (shooting their bow, at least) is their hobby, then they consider it money well spent.

I'd rather spend the money on buying materials to make my own stuff. The way I look at it, archery is my hobby (including the sub-hobbies of bowyery, arrowsmithing, string making, leatherwork, etc) and my time and efforts are well spent.

Simplicity has it's own rewards that don't necessarily show up on chrono's or tech graphs.

muzzyman88

Ok, enlighten me a little. My question is this. Even if we do end up with a bow that has straight and level nock travel, different grip positions and induced torque is still playing a factor as to how level this is right?

I'm not saying that it wont ultimatly result in a better shooting bow, but i really beleive that as long as we're close, like we are with todays bows, the difference perfectly level nock travel is going to show is going to be so minute anyway.

Also, here is another question that I've been wanting to ask. How can a perfectly tuned and synced dual cam bow not have level nock travel?