CLOUD 9, MN

I know Mathews and Hoty have gotten into it lately, and alot of it was over nock travel. Thats something I really don't hear much about at all. The bow comparison on Hunters friend with the Liberty and Diablo, had a section on Nock travel. Is there any way to check this on other bows, or a site that has this type of data? I'd really like to see this on a bunch of bows!

Thanks!

nub

I would think the best way to determine who has the straightest, is high speed photography and a shooting machine.(not a Sharpie tied on a string[&:]) Would a more forgiving cam system like the 1.5's or other hybrids make up for less than perfect line? Maybe, but thats not what we are measuring. Its not the bows fault humans induce torque.

Pinwheel says in another post he prefers to read factual data sheets. Will you or I ever see them?

CLOUD 9, MN

I would love to see them. I'm sure the companies who are the best will let you know and the others don't want that info out there!

Thanks!

Pinwheel 12

Norb Mullaney, Emery Loiselle, Larry Wise, Frank Pearson, etc, and now a new crop of techs such as Jon Silks, (who took over for Emery who recently retired at 82-- sad to see him go, I learned much from him through reading his reports and personally picking his brain. Thanks Emery!) all have performed complete technical tests (with all data included) on a variety of bows over the years in many publications---Bowhunter, Bowhunting World, Inside Archery, Archery Business, etc etc, the list is virtually endless. All of these techs have included graphs, charts, and other pertinent testing results in their detailed reports. They all use equipment specifically designed for the task at hand, as each has done this many times before. Once the individual archer learns how to correctly understand the various charts, graphs, and formulas, they can also learn to better understand the workings and attributes/fallicies of their equipment, along with other designs. They'll learn about hysteresis, force-draw curves, velocity data, efficiency data, kinetic energy, the bows' components, what they're made of, and various comments about the handling of each design when it is all put together. Very little subjective input tho. Thanks to such technical data, each and every archer can then make a better-educated decision about what design/bow really does offer the most efficiency, has the strongest materials, tightest tolerances, best geometry, and ultimately what will shoot the best with the least amount of recoil/vibration. In other words they can confidently choose their next bow because the technical data does not offer opinions, nor does it flat out lie--it is conducted exactly the same on each bow with little to no subjective testing. As far as nock travel, you have already read my thoughts on the importance of it I'm sure. All the above mentioned techs agree on it's importance also, as do many manufacturers' R&D depts. Straight and Level nock travel is indeed a very important aspect of great shooting/handling qualities. Good shooting, Pinwheel 12

Olink

Pinwheel - what you say sounds good, but the only thing I've ever seen in print that EVEN COMES CLOSE to what you describe is Norb (I've never met a bow I didn't like) Mullaney's reports in Bowhunting World. And I can never ONCE remember him doing tests for strait and level nock travel. The other problem is that only a couple of bow reports get published a year, so if a bow you are interested in isn't in that list, you are SOL. If there is something out there that is better than Norb's reports, or covers a wider range of bows, please let us know.

wolf6151

Pinwheel, it's great that a group of experts have done the research and that they agree on the importance of straight and level nock travel, but if the info. isn't readily accessible to the public then it does us no good. Is this info. available on the internet and if so would you post the link please. Also bow reviews in magazines are very subjective since they make there money from the advertisements of those bows. Norb probably never writes about a bow that he didn't like and didn't perform well because the editors of the magazine won't let that info. out, it's bad for advertising money, and he also realizes where his pay check comes from.

Pinwheel 12

Definitive nock travel testing itself has only recently come to light as a very important factor of forgiveness/increased accuracy in the evolution of bow/cam design, and therefore such testing "comparasons" are not yet available to the general public to my knowlege, nor should they be the only decisive factor when choosing a new bow, tho it is certainly important. However, this is now such a topic of hot conversation and debate that I would think that actual test results and future comparasons of differing cam design will come to the forefront very soon and also become a standard inclusion of future technical reports. The best thing for us all to do is write and express our opinions and thoughts to these magazines and techs as to what we feel would make an honest testing ground. Everyone does their best, but without input it becomes a subtantial challenge at best to find a happy medium.

As far as Norb knowing where his paycheck comes from, sure he does, but he also knows that the technical results do not lie, as also stated above. That is why most true techs do not pcik winners or bash any product---the technical results/data of testing has everything there for all to see, it's simply up to everyone to learn how to read the results. I can agree that even Norb may be a bit biased on his preferences when it comes to subjective testing just as we all are, that is why he concentrates more on the technical aspects, as do others mentioned above. Good shooting, Pinwheel 12

Len in Maryland

It is a sore subject that many companies don't really wish to discuss. Part of the problem is that there are so many differing opinions on what it is and how to measure it.

Some companies use methods which, at first, seemed to me and my associates to be crude and unlike what we had found on their products. We replicated their method, did some interpollation. The results, as they saw it, looked good. Our more detailed and methodical approach, however, showed their product to be flawed exactly like those other manufacturers they were condemning.

Unless a standard method of comparison can be found/used, you'll never get anyone to agree. We use a method that compares one to the other starting with your basic stick and string. After all, if you start with a stick and string, and it is straight and level, wouldn't that set-up be a basis/delta to compare all bows???

muzzyman88

I think the "bow wars" are turning toward this because Hoyt truely has developed a better mousetrap with the cam 1/2. I dont think its superior, but may be better in a lot of aspects than the single cam. Now, Mathews doesn't have anything to base the "our single cam is better" theory against. So now, manufacturers are trying to perfect other areas, such as nock travel to make their claim.

I personally dont think that its a big deal unless you are shooting from a machine. There are too many human elements that contribute to whether or not a bow has level nock travel. Some day, I'm sure they will develop a way to ensure that the nock does move on a single, straight plane, but until then, it does not tell me anything about a bow.

Len in Maryland

Quote:

dont think that its a big deal unless you are shooting from a machine

Sorry, but I'll have to disagree with you on this one. Since we know what each cam looks like, with respect to nock travel, we select arrows and tune for broadheads based on that knowledge. It surely speeds up the tuning process.