Limb ratings.

[BrotherRon]

will the limbs with a higher rating be closer to advertised speeds?
My 310 limbs have 95.5 on them, and the ones on my 330 have 104 on them.

Just curious.
Ron.

[xcaliber]

Well the higher the number, the more pounds to deflection from what I understand, so yes, higher number, more power. I don't know what rating is used to evaluate speed rating, but my guess would be 95. Boo would probably know for sure. 104 should be SMOKE!

[BrotherRon]

Thanks

[JUSTANUFF]

will the limbs with a higher rating be closer to advertised speeds?
My 310 limbs have 95.5 on them, and the ones on my 330 have 104 on them.

Just curious.
Ron.

Where are these numbers located?,,,my guess is on the inside of the limbs that attatch to the riser??

[mchurch]

interesting..my 380 has limbs with a 104 deflection

[awshucks]

They don't mean much as far as poundage goes. When I toured the factory in '12, there were nine numbers from 1 to 9. These were on the wider models.

There wasn't 2 # diff in them......

[Normous]

Read the post by the Excalibur Marketing Dude:

http://www.excaliburcrossbow.com/phpBB2 ... 34#p551534

[racking up points]

In my experience, the higher rated limbs are faster.

I have also found that there is more than 2fps to be gained by higher poundage limbs, (that may have been true for the EXO series but it's not for the new bows). I have tested this on 3 bows, (2 Matrix, 1 Micro), and in each case, the higher number produced more speed, sometimes by as much as 15fps but usually less. In no way is that a definitive study, it's a small sample size, but in my experience, yes it makes a difference, sometimes a big difference.

With that being said, as long as you're accurate a few FPS isn't going to change much of anything except the display on your chronograph. Another thing to consider, and I have this from The Man in Ohio himself, is that the higher deflection limbs are more prone to splintering and I can certainly my attest to that.

[Excalibur Marketing Dude]

As previously mentioned, you can't really compare one limb number to another. As an example, we just recalibrated our machine and limbs that use to show a 102 number can now be a 75. The number is only used to match limbs to avoid tiller issues and has little to do with the performance. I personally think we should use some code to avoid confusion.

You wouldn't believe how many phone calls we get where people want new limbs because their number is lower than their buddies limbs. If the number on your limbs is within .5 of each other you have a perfectly matched set of limbs and are good to go!

Peter

[colouredchameleon]

CC

[wildcatter]

I'm fully with Marketing Dude, and could care less what number is on a said set of limbs, on my Matrix I had limbs that paired as 96-96.5, 97-97.5, 98.5-99 and 99-99, these were all 380's, the 97-97.5 set gave me my my most consistent speeds, and shot 10 shot strings with the closest Extreme Spread for a 10 shot string, keeping every arrow within .8 fps of each other. The 98.5-99 set gave me my highest speeds.

Now saying that,,, it is meaningless, as the fastest limbs shot 3 fps faster than the slowest set. I have said before 10 fps is totally meaningless for out to 50 yards, as long as each shot is the same. You are talking about 1.5" more drop at 50 yards. This means if you have a multi reticle scope setup at 10 yard increments it will be off 2 yards, or the 50 yard reticle will be 48 yards with the same speed (power) setting. I personally could care less how they label them as long as they are equal as a pair. and total believe .5 difference is meaningless!! I just want them to hold up, and will use arrows over 420 grains to help that happen, as I am killing deer with enough power to take cape buffalo as it is!!!!

[newbie]

Interesting discussion.
I'm appreciated the Marketing Dudes honesty on the calibration issues with the test equipment .
(102 vs 75) WOW!!!!!! concerns me alot more than the original question by "BrotherRon".
Unless I missed something logic tells me that the limb deflection test proceduce is NOT destructive. Which should make it easy to setup a simple control test procedure ensuring calibration is mantained within an established acceptable range.
It could be as simple as doing a reqular / daily / weekly control test on a established set of limbs throughtout the acceptable measure range as a test calibration check.
Quality Asurance 101 (understanding and minimizing test error)

I think you are are taking Peters post wrong. The equipment wasnt over rating the limbs. They changed how it displays the test information ie. same limbs that used to test at 102 now read a 75. I have no idea what the numbers represent Peter would but what he is saying as long as they match within .5 the numbera are otherwise meaningless.

[racking up points]

Recalibrating the scale on that machine makes comparing older versions to new ones useless. But unless that scale has been drastically recalibrated and often in the past, there should still exist a relatively reliable baseline for us to compare one limb number to another. Has anyone ever seen a lower rated limb outperform a higher rated limb when all other variables were controlled? I have not.

Let's say something rated 102 and is now a 75 using the new "scale." Then an older 106 would still be heavier than something rated with 75 on the new scale.

To me, if I could add even just 10fps to my setup, I would do it. Even if it's overkill, even if it means just 1 1/2" @ 50y, I think the benefit is worth it. To a 3D shooter, that could mean being in or out of the 12-ring but for deer hunting, it won't make a damn of a difference.

[colouredchameleon]

CC

[racking up points]

I think you are are taking Peters post wrong. The equipment wasnt over rating the limbs. They changed how it displays the test information ie. same limbs that used to test at 102 now read a 75. I have no idea what the numbers represent Peter would but what he is saying as long as they match within .5 the numbera are otherwise meaningless.

re-
prefix
1.
indicating return to a previous condition, restoration,

Word Origin and History for re-

word-forming element meaning "back to the original place"


as in Re-calibrate[/quote]

Well thanks for clearing that up, CC.