What makes a 3D bow great?
03-05-2002, 06:18 AM
#31
Boone & Crockett
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lehigh County PA USA
Posts: 12,157
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Darn it Jeff! You stayed up later than I did last night and got to put the "round ending comments in"! No fair! <img src=icon_smile_evil.gif border=0 align=middle>
Will anybody aid NorthJeff in his quest to defend the single cam reputation? Stay tuned and find out......
Ok....Day Two..or should I say Round Two!
<font color=red>Ding....</font id=red><font color=blue>Ding....</font id=blue>.....<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_blackeye.gif border=0 align=middle>
Will anybody aid NorthJeff in his quest to defend the single cam reputation? Stay tuned and find out......
Ok....Day Two..or should I say Round Two!
<font color=red>Ding....</font id=red><font color=blue>Ding....</font id=blue>.....<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle><img src=icon_smile_blackeye.gif border=0 align=middle>
03-05-2002, 06:29 AM
#32
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: .. NH USA
Posts: 970
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
AND HE COMES OUT SWINGING! <img src=icon_smile_big.gif border=0 align=middle> <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
NorthJeff-
After reading the George Ryals IV article again, he also mentions that even in Pro shooting, a slightly soft shot will hit over 1/4" high at 20 yds with a solo. As will an overly hard shot. Conventional solos are more critical of shooter input. This, again, is FACT. Twins can be "supertuned" to have the same exact impact point regardless of creep or overdraw. This is FACT, also. Conventional solos, cannot. Yes, Mike won Vegas. Jeff won it last year. Both are excellent shooters and you cannot take anything away from them, they've worked very hard to get where they are today. Sounds to me like you are, as well. Could they have won it with ANY bow on that given day? Absolutely. Far too much emphasis is being placed on the equipment, not the shooter. Do they get paid big bucks to be on Mathews' squad? Again, absolutely. Another top shooter gets the "big bucks", too-- Dave Cousins. He just tied his NAA World Record this past weekend, shooting a 598 out of 600. The NAA uses the baby X Vegas as a 10. He missed only TWO through four rounds of intense competition. Awesome feat. World Record, again. His choice? Hoyt with TWIN cams. Just goes to show that EITHER bow will work in the appropriate hands.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
I sell more solos that twins, and am not from the "older gang" trying to push them out simply because I don't like them, I always try to back my points up with technical fact.(I am however admittedly getting to be a "grizzled veteran" as someone--thanks JeffB!--put it<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>) My hunting clientel love them, and I feel this is where they shine. I shot them myself in 3D competition for three years while on Factory Staff.(it's what they wanted me to shoot because it was their new product) Every manufacturer wants their shooting Staff to do this. Every one. Jeff gets away with the original Conquest Pro because he told them this is the bow he is going to shoot, bottom line. (Funny tho how after all of this time he chooses to shoot a bow that is over 5 years old, and he feels the companies' new bows aren't up to par with it? Always wondered about that?) Seeing as you are so critical of how a person scores, I can tell you I have many, many titles and awards scattered about, and have shot a perfect round in State 3D competition, and when I put in the practice time, am always "still in the running". It's like riding a bike, you don't forget how, you just need to keep up with it if you plan on riding wheelies and being in top form. When was the last time you saw Randy Ulmer win a 3D? or Burley Hall? Two of the "best of the best". Are they any less a person, or have less knowledge of the sport or equipment because they haven't won recently? (I'm in the same age range) So I rest my case on the scoring issue. My Archery businesses have taken precedence over my National competitive shooting in the past few years, as have my wifes' health issues, but I am firmly rooted within the industry and know what's going on,(most of the time) make no mistake there. I still shoot many bows each year, I don't have to have my name "up in lights" daily to know what works and what does not, simliar to those mentioned above.
Facts are facts, and yes solos are here to stay. I'm not trying to "steal them away from anyone", or force people and customers not to buy them, but merely stating realistic facts. A twin is currently more forgiving of shooter input error, and that's the bottom line. People that get used to the design of the conventional solo and can learn to overcome these issues will not be affected by them, but it does take some time. Most twins are also 65% letoff, not 80% as are most solos, and this is another factor that can add to shooter input error, simply because the 80% is easier to draw out of it's natural path and cause left/right shots. While all of the solos' manifested problems are admittedly a minor pain, they can be a pain nonetheless. It is up to each individual to determine what will work best for their application at hand. Newer designs are gaining ground every day, and eventually I feel solos will come even with and even surpass the twins!<img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle> Just not quite yet. Don't forget, solos are still in their infancy. Twins have a 30 year jump on them. Just my own thoughts, Pinwheel 12
Edited by - Pinwheel 12 on 03/05/2002 08:34:45
NorthJeff-
After reading the George Ryals IV article again, he also mentions that even in Pro shooting, a slightly soft shot will hit over 1/4" high at 20 yds with a solo. As will an overly hard shot. Conventional solos are more critical of shooter input. This, again, is FACT. Twins can be "supertuned" to have the same exact impact point regardless of creep or overdraw. This is FACT, also. Conventional solos, cannot. Yes, Mike won Vegas. Jeff won it last year. Both are excellent shooters and you cannot take anything away from them, they've worked very hard to get where they are today. Sounds to me like you are, as well. Could they have won it with ANY bow on that given day? Absolutely. Far too much emphasis is being placed on the equipment, not the shooter. Do they get paid big bucks to be on Mathews' squad? Again, absolutely. Another top shooter gets the "big bucks", too-- Dave Cousins. He just tied his NAA World Record this past weekend, shooting a 598 out of 600. The NAA uses the baby X Vegas as a 10. He missed only TWO through four rounds of intense competition. Awesome feat. World Record, again. His choice? Hoyt with TWIN cams. Just goes to show that EITHER bow will work in the appropriate hands.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
I sell more solos that twins, and am not from the "older gang" trying to push them out simply because I don't like them, I always try to back my points up with technical fact.(I am however admittedly getting to be a "grizzled veteran" as someone--thanks JeffB!--put it<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>) My hunting clientel love them, and I feel this is where they shine. I shot them myself in 3D competition for three years while on Factory Staff.(it's what they wanted me to shoot because it was their new product) Every manufacturer wants their shooting Staff to do this. Every one. Jeff gets away with the original Conquest Pro because he told them this is the bow he is going to shoot, bottom line. (Funny tho how after all of this time he chooses to shoot a bow that is over 5 years old, and he feels the companies' new bows aren't up to par with it? Always wondered about that?) Seeing as you are so critical of how a person scores, I can tell you I have many, many titles and awards scattered about, and have shot a perfect round in State 3D competition, and when I put in the practice time, am always "still in the running". It's like riding a bike, you don't forget how, you just need to keep up with it if you plan on riding wheelies and being in top form. When was the last time you saw Randy Ulmer win a 3D? or Burley Hall? Two of the "best of the best". Are they any less a person, or have less knowledge of the sport or equipment because they haven't won recently? (I'm in the same age range) So I rest my case on the scoring issue. My Archery businesses have taken precedence over my National competitive shooting in the past few years, as have my wifes' health issues, but I am firmly rooted within the industry and know what's going on,(most of the time) make no mistake there. I still shoot many bows each year, I don't have to have my name "up in lights" daily to know what works and what does not, simliar to those mentioned above.
Facts are facts, and yes solos are here to stay. I'm not trying to "steal them away from anyone", or force people and customers not to buy them, but merely stating realistic facts. A twin is currently more forgiving of shooter input error, and that's the bottom line. People that get used to the design of the conventional solo and can learn to overcome these issues will not be affected by them, but it does take some time. Most twins are also 65% letoff, not 80% as are most solos, and this is another factor that can add to shooter input error, simply because the 80% is easier to draw out of it's natural path and cause left/right shots. While all of the solos' manifested problems are admittedly a minor pain, they can be a pain nonetheless. It is up to each individual to determine what will work best for their application at hand. Newer designs are gaining ground every day, and eventually I feel solos will come even with and even surpass the twins!<img src=icon_smile_shock.gif border=0 align=middle> Just not quite yet. Don't forget, solos are still in their infancy. Twins have a 30 year jump on them. Just my own thoughts, Pinwheel 12
Edited by - Pinwheel 12 on 03/05/2002 08:34:45
03-05-2002, 08:33 AM
#33
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Munising MI
Posts: 501
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Pinwheel,
I no I'm not going to change your mind, but your talking to someone with over 8 years experience of shooting a one-cam. During that 8 year period, I went from shooting 60x's with TP, to 60x's without. I've gone through many different models (all Mathews), and different successes with most. Even my release style has changed slightly, although I've used the same release for target now for 7 years. I've been at that type of shooting level for more years than you and George Ryals have shot a one-cam, probably put together. You won't agree with me, but through a couple years of punching, and many more of using Back Tension, my bows have always hit where the dot was when it went off. I can't say I remember an arrow that I looked at the bow and wondered why it went where it did.
In all those years, with thousands of shots, and many bows, wouldn't you think I'd get one errant, unexplained arrow, according to your theory?
Talk about progress, I switched from a Golden Eagle Monarch with round/rounds in the winter of 93/94, shooting a 55/56x avg., to shooting a 59x round the first time using a one-cam, and immediatley shooting a 60x game and averaging 59X. I've been sold on them ever since, and I can honestly say, even with moments of bad form, bad footing, wind, bad gas, or whatever else can cause inconsistancy, the bows have still shot true.
I've also shot 65%, or 80%, just whatever was winning at the time, with no difference in bow performance.
During that time I've seen many average one-cam shooters raise their indoor scores substantialy, even shooting their first 300's and other great steps.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, you can argue all the technical points and theories you want, but from a shooters stand point, your theories don't hold water. In the shop and in the range are two different aspects.
You mentioned Randy Ulmer and Burley Hall, the only reason Ulmer hasn't won recently, was because he hasn't been competing. Ulmer is in a class of his own, with his performance not only on the target butt and 3D Range, but on the 3D range when the shooters won, because they were shooters. There are very few shooters in Ulmer's class, Burley has the titles, but he's not. I guess to use old titles and awards of the past really don't mean much to me in your basis of shooting ability, unless you can still compete at the current level needed to win. I could go on and on about the old names of the sport, about how great of shooters they were in their day, and they were, but it's a different game now, and it takes a much higher level of shooting skill to win. I know this because of shot with some of them-Ulmer, Lenny Highlen(sp?), Badeye, and more.
Those guys were great in their time, but most of them I wouldn't expect to no the diffence between good bows, and how they perform, and to put yourself on the same level with them-are you an Ulmer, or a Burley? Maybe their isn't a difference in class, what they have accomplished, and what they have contributed to archery, but can you honestly tell me they have the same abilities?
Sorry if I seem kind of harsh, but I know the one-cams better than most of the guys out there, and I couldn't disagree with your theories more, based on a shooters point of view.
Some like to tinker, some like to shoot, I guess that's just the way it will be.
Jeff...U.P. of Michigan
I no I'm not going to change your mind, but your talking to someone with over 8 years experience of shooting a one-cam. During that 8 year period, I went from shooting 60x's with TP, to 60x's without. I've gone through many different models (all Mathews), and different successes with most. Even my release style has changed slightly, although I've used the same release for target now for 7 years. I've been at that type of shooting level for more years than you and George Ryals have shot a one-cam, probably put together. You won't agree with me, but through a couple years of punching, and many more of using Back Tension, my bows have always hit where the dot was when it went off. I can't say I remember an arrow that I looked at the bow and wondered why it went where it did.
In all those years, with thousands of shots, and many bows, wouldn't you think I'd get one errant, unexplained arrow, according to your theory?
Talk about progress, I switched from a Golden Eagle Monarch with round/rounds in the winter of 93/94, shooting a 55/56x avg., to shooting a 59x round the first time using a one-cam, and immediatley shooting a 60x game and averaging 59X. I've been sold on them ever since, and I can honestly say, even with moments of bad form, bad footing, wind, bad gas, or whatever else can cause inconsistancy, the bows have still shot true.
I've also shot 65%, or 80%, just whatever was winning at the time, with no difference in bow performance.
During that time I've seen many average one-cam shooters raise their indoor scores substantialy, even shooting their first 300's and other great steps.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, you can argue all the technical points and theories you want, but from a shooters stand point, your theories don't hold water. In the shop and in the range are two different aspects.
You mentioned Randy Ulmer and Burley Hall, the only reason Ulmer hasn't won recently, was because he hasn't been competing. Ulmer is in a class of his own, with his performance not only on the target butt and 3D Range, but on the 3D range when the shooters won, because they were shooters. There are very few shooters in Ulmer's class, Burley has the titles, but he's not. I guess to use old titles and awards of the past really don't mean much to me in your basis of shooting ability, unless you can still compete at the current level needed to win. I could go on and on about the old names of the sport, about how great of shooters they were in their day, and they were, but it's a different game now, and it takes a much higher level of shooting skill to win. I know this because of shot with some of them-Ulmer, Lenny Highlen(sp?), Badeye, and more.
Those guys were great in their time, but most of them I wouldn't expect to no the diffence between good bows, and how they perform, and to put yourself on the same level with them-are you an Ulmer, or a Burley? Maybe their isn't a difference in class, what they have accomplished, and what they have contributed to archery, but can you honestly tell me they have the same abilities?
Sorry if I seem kind of harsh, but I know the one-cams better than most of the guys out there, and I couldn't disagree with your theories more, based on a shooters point of view.
Some like to tinker, some like to shoot, I guess that's just the way it will be.
Jeff...U.P. of Michigan
03-05-2002, 09:26 AM
#34
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: .. NH USA
Posts: 970
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Jeff-
You are the cocky sort, I'll give you that, and saying that the older shooters are no where near as good as the archers of today is pure BS and a slap in all of our faces, thank-you very much! I've also shot with Randy, Burley, and many others in my day, and I am a little surprised that you would all in one breath state Randy is in a class by himself, yet at the same time basically say that today 3D is much more competitive and no-one from then can compete if you compared the two. Really? Funny how some of the scores haven't changed much over the years, tho our equipment now is much better than it used to be. AND everyone ranges with binoculars, uses fat shafts, have umbrellas to block sun and wind, wide open lanes to the target instead of a 3" hole, etc,. And even WITH this better equipment and gimmicks, there were still only a couple of perfect scores shot in National 3D competition to date, amazing what with all of the "much better shooters" they have nowadays that this is the best that can be done! I think it's time to get a much bigger mirror, because your head won't fit in the one you have currently if you think like that. No respect for other archers unless they score high, unfortunately this is happening alot and it's sad to see. This will be my last post on this subject, I'm getting quite disgusted with this rhetoric, so I'll leave you with this--there is a definate difference between "Pro Archers" and "Pro shooters". Some "Pro shooters" ARE "Pro Archers", and some certainly are not. Makes no difference to me if you or anyone else can shoot a 300 with 60X or a 200 with 0x, I will respect you or them the same as any other archer. Unfortunately some still have to learn this detail, and this detail is a big part of the difference between the two. I sincerely hope you find the difference in the future, and not rely simply on your "8 years of experience with Mathews bows", however many thousands of 300's with 60X, etc., because sooner or later you'll come to find that it really doesn't matter to anyone but you, unless your name happens to be Ulmer, Hall, Hopkins or Cousins, or you make your own niche in the record books. I wish you good luck and sincere best wishes that you find your pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Just the thoughts of an "old school" shooter that ain't worth squat because he cannot compete with the young pups anymore. (LOL. yeah, right) Pinwheel 12, out.
You are the cocky sort, I'll give you that, and saying that the older shooters are no where near as good as the archers of today is pure BS and a slap in all of our faces, thank-you very much! I've also shot with Randy, Burley, and many others in my day, and I am a little surprised that you would all in one breath state Randy is in a class by himself, yet at the same time basically say that today 3D is much more competitive and no-one from then can compete if you compared the two. Really? Funny how some of the scores haven't changed much over the years, tho our equipment now is much better than it used to be. AND everyone ranges with binoculars, uses fat shafts, have umbrellas to block sun and wind, wide open lanes to the target instead of a 3" hole, etc,. And even WITH this better equipment and gimmicks, there were still only a couple of perfect scores shot in National 3D competition to date, amazing what with all of the "much better shooters" they have nowadays that this is the best that can be done! I think it's time to get a much bigger mirror, because your head won't fit in the one you have currently if you think like that. No respect for other archers unless they score high, unfortunately this is happening alot and it's sad to see. This will be my last post on this subject, I'm getting quite disgusted with this rhetoric, so I'll leave you with this--there is a definate difference between "Pro Archers" and "Pro shooters". Some "Pro shooters" ARE "Pro Archers", and some certainly are not. Makes no difference to me if you or anyone else can shoot a 300 with 60X or a 200 with 0x, I will respect you or them the same as any other archer. Unfortunately some still have to learn this detail, and this detail is a big part of the difference between the two. I sincerely hope you find the difference in the future, and not rely simply on your "8 years of experience with Mathews bows", however many thousands of 300's with 60X, etc., because sooner or later you'll come to find that it really doesn't matter to anyone but you, unless your name happens to be Ulmer, Hall, Hopkins or Cousins, or you make your own niche in the record books. I wish you good luck and sincere best wishes that you find your pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. Just the thoughts of an "old school" shooter that ain't worth squat because he cannot compete with the young pups anymore. (LOL. yeah, right) Pinwheel 12, out.
03-05-2002, 09:36 AM
#35
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,413
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Is it possible that some single cam bows are easier to shoot (more forgiving) than other single cam bows? That might go along way towards explaining why two guys "in the know" can have such differing opinions.
I'm just glad that they're close enough in forgiveness that a good shooter can win with either. I'm a bowhunter and will continue to choose single cams, because in general they're quieter. Besides, a 1/4" at 20 yards doesn't mean much to me.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> It won't make any difference when shooting at a deer at that range.
I'm just glad that they're close enough in forgiveness that a good shooter can win with either. I'm a bowhunter and will continue to choose single cams, because in general they're quieter. Besides, a 1/4" at 20 yards doesn't mean much to me.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> It won't make any difference when shooting at a deer at that range.
03-05-2002, 10:06 AM
#36
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 520
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
I am not sure they are so far appart, what we need is xmas in the trenches. They both say that there are really good bows of both types, the heat is all over the idea that one type has a minute edge based either on someone's personal style, or tunning method.
NorthJeff, if you are right, then by your own definition, it is impossible for any of us to know that you are, because we aren't good enough shooter to prove it to ourselves, and don't have 8 years experience with all these bows while we were at the same time good shooters.
And P12 you may be right also, but I don't expect to hear people laying rubber through the neighbouhood on the way to the archery shop to buy 2 cams. Most local dealers lack your ability to get them any further out of the store than out of the box.
That one shooter stays with the Conquest Pro doesn't mean that it is a better bow. Top shooters know the bow isn't the key, it maters, but the exact model may not be as important as a particular bow within a model, even that may not mater. Model changes clearly disrupt some shooters, and when they start coming once a year or more often, it can be a distraction.
Chances are Jay Barrs might still be shooting the bent mag riser recurve he won the '88 Olympics with if he could. Then they brought out the Avalon, recently they are averaging a new bow a year. They may all be improvements, but I think Jay said it takes him a month or more of tunning just to get the bow where he wants it. Who wants to go through that every year? What's the confidence worth of having, in your hand, the bow you won the Olympics with?
NorthJeff, if you are right, then by your own definition, it is impossible for any of us to know that you are, because we aren't good enough shooter to prove it to ourselves, and don't have 8 years experience with all these bows while we were at the same time good shooters.
And P12 you may be right also, but I don't expect to hear people laying rubber through the neighbouhood on the way to the archery shop to buy 2 cams. Most local dealers lack your ability to get them any further out of the store than out of the box.
That one shooter stays with the Conquest Pro doesn't mean that it is a better bow. Top shooters know the bow isn't the key, it maters, but the exact model may not be as important as a particular bow within a model, even that may not mater. Model changes clearly disrupt some shooters, and when they start coming once a year or more often, it can be a distraction.
Chances are Jay Barrs might still be shooting the bent mag riser recurve he won the '88 Olympics with if he could. Then they brought out the Avalon, recently they are averaging a new bow a year. They may all be improvements, but I think Jay said it takes him a month or more of tunning just to get the bow where he wants it. Who wants to go through that every year? What's the confidence worth of having, in your hand, the bow you won the Olympics with?
03-05-2002, 10:06 AM
#37
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Munising MI
Posts: 501
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Pinwheel 12,
Maybe you won't reply, but you can at least read this.
"solos are more critical for the average shooter-inherently inaccurate". I applaud your technical theories, I know for a fact you are very knowlegable, but again, from a shooter's point of view, from someone with one-cam experience, I disagree. You brought up your titles and awards to back your claim, I brought up mine.
As I said earlier, Burley has great class, and has contributed greatly to the sport. I feel Ulmer could still compete at a very high level. When 3D was big 10-15 years ago, how many 3D shooters were winning on the target scene? How many shot on the target scene? How many had those abilities? Maybe you don't like scores, but most of the entire pro class can shoot 55+x indoors nowdays. Can you tell me that was the case 15 years ago?
When those guys were winning back then it was a big deal, but it was a different sport. Whether you like it or not, to say those guys from 15 years ago are somehow, now, at this point, great form and technical shooters, when most of them weren't then, is inaccurate.
The entire basis of your inferior solo claim is that all of these guys knew bows 10-15 years ago, so they must know now that a one-cam is inferior today. How?? I've tried to point out that, if someone with experience, can't tell the difference, who can? somone who doesn't even shoot them? or someone so entrenched in the 30 years of dual cam history that they fail to give respect where respect is due?
I like to stick up for the one-cams, because I know how much I've enjoyed shooting them, I see what they've added to archery, and they sometimes don't get the respect they deserve from some of the more seasoned tournament archers.
If you take that as a slap in the face to all the shooters from the early days of 3D, I'm sorry you see it that way, but the sport has changed. Target and 3D, once seperate, have come closer together than ever in the past couple of years, fostering new levels of ability, and understanding, of archery form and technique.
If I try to argue one-cam specs, theories, physics, and every technical aspect of their particular design, admitingly you have much more knowlege, the only thing I have to back my claim is my experience, and my actual working knowledge of the abilities of a one-cam bow.
Technical people can have one view, and always do, based on science and controlled situations, but that doesn't always agree with the shooters point of view, and I just feel this is one of those cases.
Again, I'm not saying a one-cam is better, but it's at least equal, and I'll do my best to stick up for that theory, by experience.
Jeff...U.P. of Michigan.
Maybe you won't reply, but you can at least read this.
"solos are more critical for the average shooter-inherently inaccurate". I applaud your technical theories, I know for a fact you are very knowlegable, but again, from a shooter's point of view, from someone with one-cam experience, I disagree. You brought up your titles and awards to back your claim, I brought up mine.
As I said earlier, Burley has great class, and has contributed greatly to the sport. I feel Ulmer could still compete at a very high level. When 3D was big 10-15 years ago, how many 3D shooters were winning on the target scene? How many shot on the target scene? How many had those abilities? Maybe you don't like scores, but most of the entire pro class can shoot 55+x indoors nowdays. Can you tell me that was the case 15 years ago?
When those guys were winning back then it was a big deal, but it was a different sport. Whether you like it or not, to say those guys from 15 years ago are somehow, now, at this point, great form and technical shooters, when most of them weren't then, is inaccurate.
The entire basis of your inferior solo claim is that all of these guys knew bows 10-15 years ago, so they must know now that a one-cam is inferior today. How?? I've tried to point out that, if someone with experience, can't tell the difference, who can? somone who doesn't even shoot them? or someone so entrenched in the 30 years of dual cam history that they fail to give respect where respect is due?
I like to stick up for the one-cams, because I know how much I've enjoyed shooting them, I see what they've added to archery, and they sometimes don't get the respect they deserve from some of the more seasoned tournament archers.
If you take that as a slap in the face to all the shooters from the early days of 3D, I'm sorry you see it that way, but the sport has changed. Target and 3D, once seperate, have come closer together than ever in the past couple of years, fostering new levels of ability, and understanding, of archery form and technique.
If I try to argue one-cam specs, theories, physics, and every technical aspect of their particular design, admitingly you have much more knowlege, the only thing I have to back my claim is my experience, and my actual working knowledge of the abilities of a one-cam bow.
Technical people can have one view, and always do, based on science and controlled situations, but that doesn't always agree with the shooters point of view, and I just feel this is one of those cases.
Again, I'm not saying a one-cam is better, but it's at least equal, and I'll do my best to stick up for that theory, by experience.
Jeff...U.P. of Michigan.
03-05-2002, 11:05 AM
#38
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: .. NH USA
Posts: 970
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Jeff-
OK, I'm going to try this one more time.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
1) Most Field archers migrated over to 3D when it was implemented. In fact, they/we were the ones that wanted to get away from the target aspect a bit and get in some good, solid hunting practice. Many of the early 3D shooters were accomplished field and indoor archers, Randy is no exception there, either, Burley played all of the games, as well.
2) All archers that compete at a high level must have exquisite form, doesn't matter what format you shoot. I used to punch also, and could still shoot excellently, it is all based on form, execution, and practice. I know alot of current 3D Pros that punch like the dickens, yet still score well. All of the top shooters have excellent form and abilities, doesn't matter if they were winning in the 1940's or today, there still has to be a definate talent there to excel.
3) I'm not disputing your findings as what you believe to be true in your individual case, but knowing MANY other techs and Pro shooters who have come to the same conclusions as myself, and having also shot both designs in competition in recent years,(I only just dropped off of Factory Staff at the end of the 1999 season due to work conflicts and my wife's health) I have to retain my overall views and thoughts about the subject. 3D is currently the only Archery format that is dominated by solocams. All other pure target formats are dominated by finely-tuned twins. Of course, they each can be won with either, it all depends on what the Pros shoot. I truly urge you to read that article by George if you can find a copy of the Jan/Feb Archery Business.
4)As stated, I do believe they both have their place, and there is room for both. I do wish that more archers could come together instead of being segregated by formats, styles, types of bows, and yes, even scores, because a hundred years from now, it's not going to matter anyway. So we might as well make the best of it! <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> It's the camaraderie of the sport that matters, not what format or equipment we shoot, or if we scored a 300 or a 200, or shoot a 12 pointer or a spike. It's all about the sport itself.
5) Sorry if I got heated in my previous post, but I do not take kindly to being "called out" or termed a "lesser, old school archer" when I know for a fact that I am not. All I have to do is look around my own trophy room to know better. (currently numbering 146 awards and titles to date with one World. There, now you know, tho I don't like to brag about things like this as I feel it has nothing to do with my overall experience or knowledge of the sport.)
Good shooting, Pinwheel 12
Edited by - Pinwheel 12 on 03/05/2002 12:06:54
OK, I'm going to try this one more time.<img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle>
1) Most Field archers migrated over to 3D when it was implemented. In fact, they/we were the ones that wanted to get away from the target aspect a bit and get in some good, solid hunting practice. Many of the early 3D shooters were accomplished field and indoor archers, Randy is no exception there, either, Burley played all of the games, as well.
2) All archers that compete at a high level must have exquisite form, doesn't matter what format you shoot. I used to punch also, and could still shoot excellently, it is all based on form, execution, and practice. I know alot of current 3D Pros that punch like the dickens, yet still score well. All of the top shooters have excellent form and abilities, doesn't matter if they were winning in the 1940's or today, there still has to be a definate talent there to excel.
3) I'm not disputing your findings as what you believe to be true in your individual case, but knowing MANY other techs and Pro shooters who have come to the same conclusions as myself, and having also shot both designs in competition in recent years,(I only just dropped off of Factory Staff at the end of the 1999 season due to work conflicts and my wife's health) I have to retain my overall views and thoughts about the subject. 3D is currently the only Archery format that is dominated by solocams. All other pure target formats are dominated by finely-tuned twins. Of course, they each can be won with either, it all depends on what the Pros shoot. I truly urge you to read that article by George if you can find a copy of the Jan/Feb Archery Business.
4)As stated, I do believe they both have their place, and there is room for both. I do wish that more archers could come together instead of being segregated by formats, styles, types of bows, and yes, even scores, because a hundred years from now, it's not going to matter anyway. So we might as well make the best of it! <img src=icon_smile_wink.gif border=0 align=middle> It's the camaraderie of the sport that matters, not what format or equipment we shoot, or if we scored a 300 or a 200, or shoot a 12 pointer or a spike. It's all about the sport itself.
5) Sorry if I got heated in my previous post, but I do not take kindly to being "called out" or termed a "lesser, old school archer" when I know for a fact that I am not. All I have to do is look around my own trophy room to know better. (currently numbering 146 awards and titles to date with one World. There, now you know, tho I don't like to brag about things like this as I feel it has nothing to do with my overall experience or knowledge of the sport.)
Good shooting, Pinwheel 12
Edited by - Pinwheel 12 on 03/05/2002 12:06:54
03-05-2002, 12:31 PM
#39
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location:
Posts: 2,413
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Why can't this stuff be proven by using a Hooter Shooter? I would think you could set the machine to a 1/16" creep and see where the arrow goes in relationship to one shot at the proper anchor. Is it possible to test this with a machine?
03-05-2002, 01:20 PM
#40
Typical Buck
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Munising MI
Posts: 501
RE: What makes a 3D bow great?
Ossage,
Most of the top bows out there today, a top shooter could not know how he or she would perform with them over the long run in just a few weeks. If they fit into the catagory of a great shooting bow, then most people couldn't tell the diffence between them in the long run. I've seen diffences in some of the models I've owned. One in particular I could shoot around 56-58 x's with, while at the same time, my other bows I could shoot 59-60x. I didn't own that bow for very long, and it wouldn't fit into that great shooting bow catagory, as far as I'm concerned, and mathews hasn't offered it in the past couple of years.
The point is, if the top shooters aren't concerned about supposed minor inconsistancies, and can't tell the diffence, why should the average shooter? If a pro can't tell the difference at 60 yards, what would an average shooter be able to tell at 30? it becomes irrelevant.
Dual cams dominating target? The most prestigious, well known target shoots are Vegas, NFAA indoors, Redding, and the NFAA outdoor nationals. Looking at the 2001,2002 shoots, starting with Vegas, someone has won with a one-cam 3 out of 5 shoots. 2 wins at Vegas, and 1 at the very prestigious NFAA outdoor nationals. Granted the dual cams had 2 out of 5 wins, but dominating? Even if there is a domination at other events, that domination lasts long enough for the one-cam shooters to show up for the contigancy money, and the field is even again.
Again, I really feel the target and 3D archers have come closer over just the last few years. More than ever guys are crossing lines and shooting each sport. I shot with guys 10 years ago that could shoot a 60x game, or a 550 field round, and none of them shot 3D. Were the majority of 3D guys shooting at that level back then? because they are now. I know Dave McMillan did, Ulmer, and I'm sure there were more, but did the majority? like they do now?
Bottom line, to me:Sponsorship talk asside, one-cams are dominating 3D, true, it's not just the bow, but it shows its more than adequate. One cams have taken several of the latest, most prestigious target events, with no domination by either the solo or the dual, as far as I can see.
As far as the technical aspect, I don't even need to see the reports, anything can be proven, technicly, anything. But as far as tournament results, both target and 3D, I don't see how someone could argue the capability of a solo cam. Again, better than a dual-cam? who cares! it's at least as good-that's the point!
Also, you don't need to put the bow in a Hooter Shooter, just get a tape of Michael Andersons performance at Vegas, and see how many high arrows he shot.
Jeff...U.P. of Michigan
Most of the top bows out there today, a top shooter could not know how he or she would perform with them over the long run in just a few weeks. If they fit into the catagory of a great shooting bow, then most people couldn't tell the diffence between them in the long run. I've seen diffences in some of the models I've owned. One in particular I could shoot around 56-58 x's with, while at the same time, my other bows I could shoot 59-60x. I didn't own that bow for very long, and it wouldn't fit into that great shooting bow catagory, as far as I'm concerned, and mathews hasn't offered it in the past couple of years.
The point is, if the top shooters aren't concerned about supposed minor inconsistancies, and can't tell the diffence, why should the average shooter? If a pro can't tell the difference at 60 yards, what would an average shooter be able to tell at 30? it becomes irrelevant.
Dual cams dominating target? The most prestigious, well known target shoots are Vegas, NFAA indoors, Redding, and the NFAA outdoor nationals. Looking at the 2001,2002 shoots, starting with Vegas, someone has won with a one-cam 3 out of 5 shoots. 2 wins at Vegas, and 1 at the very prestigious NFAA outdoor nationals. Granted the dual cams had 2 out of 5 wins, but dominating? Even if there is a domination at other events, that domination lasts long enough for the one-cam shooters to show up for the contigancy money, and the field is even again.
Again, I really feel the target and 3D archers have come closer over just the last few years. More than ever guys are crossing lines and shooting each sport. I shot with guys 10 years ago that could shoot a 60x game, or a 550 field round, and none of them shot 3D. Were the majority of 3D guys shooting at that level back then? because they are now. I know Dave McMillan did, Ulmer, and I'm sure there were more, but did the majority? like they do now?
Bottom line, to me:Sponsorship talk asside, one-cams are dominating 3D, true, it's not just the bow, but it shows its more than adequate. One cams have taken several of the latest, most prestigious target events, with no domination by either the solo or the dual, as far as I can see.
As far as the technical aspect, I don't even need to see the reports, anything can be proven, technicly, anything. But as far as tournament results, both target and 3D, I don't see how someone could argue the capability of a solo cam. Again, better than a dual-cam? who cares! it's at least as good-that's the point!
Also, you don't need to put the bow in a Hooter Shooter, just get a tape of Michael Andersons performance at Vegas, and see how many high arrows he shot.
Jeff...U.P. of Michigan