FINDING THE STATIC SPINE OF ARROWS

[hankenhunter]

Thanks Paul for bringing it up. I read about this about 4 years ago and then promptly forgot about it. I have a bucket load of fire bolts that need spine testing. I tried a different method that seems to work by the same principle. I dulled two exacto blades and mounted them parallel to each other an inch apart on a small piece of two by four. Lay the center of the arrow across the two blades and the arrow rolls to the heavy side. I did this three times on each arrow to make sure. For this to work you have to have a very level surface to put the spiner on. Graphics will definitely roll to the bottom. I'm intrigued with the water method though because of it's simplicity and will try it out as soon as I can find some plastic nocks. All I have are the metal Excal ones.
Hank

[paulaboutform]

Thanks Paul for bringing it up. I read about this about 4 years ago and then promptly forgot about it. I have a bucket load of fire bolts that need spine testing. I tried a different method that seems to work by the same principle. I dulled two exacto blades and mounted them parallel to each other an inch apart on a small piece of two by four. Lay the center of the arrow across the two blades and the arrow rolls to the heavy side. I did this three times on each arrow to make sure. For this to work you have to have a very level surface to put the spiner on. Graphics will definitely roll to the bottom. I'm intrigued with the water method though because of it's simplicity and will try it out as soon as I can find some plastic nocks. All I have are the metal Excal ones.
Hank

Try screwing field points in each end. I don't know if the excess weight will sink the shaft but if it doesn't it should work.

Paul

[hankenhunter]

Thanks Paul for bringing it up. I read about this about 4 years ago and then promptly forgot about it. I have a bucket load of fire bolts that need spine testing. I tried a different method that seems to work by the same principle. I dulled two exacto blades and mounted them parallel to each other an inch apart on a small piece of two by four. Lay the center of the arrow across the two blades and the arrow rolls to the heavy side. I did this three times on each arrow to make sure. For this to work you have to have a very level surface to put the spiner on. Graphics will definitely roll to the bottom. I'm intrigued with the water method though because of it's simplicity and will try it out as soon as I can find some plastic nocks. All I have are the metal Excal ones.
Hank

Try screwing field points in each end. I don't know if the excess weight will sink the shaft but if it doesn't it should work.

Now there's a thought. Thanks. Bath time is going to be fun tonight. Better lock the door though, somebody might get the wrong idea.
Hank
Paul

[paulaboutform]

[newbie]

Paul i believe i read someplace that this method worked with aluminum shafts due to their construction. Carbon arrows are made different and the heavy side doesn't necessarily line up with the spine.
Now i have been wrond before and i know i will be in the future.
im going to go dig and see if i can find the article.

Joe im pretty sure R15s will be coming with BEA arrows not GT.

edit here is one link Paul.

http://www.crossbownation.com/community ... est.26527/

http://www.crossbownation.com/community ... own.23540/

[TomBear]

I recently watched a YouTube video of a guy testing arrows for static spine in a water bath. He put a few inches of water in a tub and added some soap to it. I'm guessing dish soap to help the arrow spin easier. He then put a plastic nock in both ends of the bare shaft and floated it in the water. He gave the shaft a little 'bump' and it spun to the heavy side down which is, theoretically, the spine stiff side. The bowstring can be purchased from the www.prolinebowstrings.com on proline bowstrings. He repeated this a couple more times and the shaft spun to the same position each time. This looked very simple and makes sense to me. However, I'm curious to see how accurate this really is against shafts that have been marked out on an actual spine tester. I have shafts I'm going to check this way but none of them have been spine tested and marked already.
If any of you have shafts that came marked for spine for you, will you please check the water bath method and report back if you get the same reading. If it's the same this will be a great way for us to index our own shafts quickly and easily....and the price is right! I'll be doing mine regardless, but it'd be nice to know the actual precision of the bath method.

Paul

Really great info! Thanks for the share

[paulaboutform]

Paul i believe i read someplace that this method worked with aluminum shafts due to their construction. Carbon arrows are made different and the heavy side doesn't necessarily line up with the spine.
Now i have been wrond before and i know i will be in the future.
im going to go dig and see if i can find the article.

Joe im pretty sure R15s will be coming with BEA arrows not GT.

edit here is one link Paul.

http://www.crossbownation.com/community ... est.26527/

http://www.crossbownation.com/community ... own.23540/

Hi Mike. This is kind of the point of this thread. I wanted to test some arrows that have been checked for static spine (like on a ram tester) then float them to see how close they are. Currently I start with the etched straitness/length marks as the cock vane then shoot each vane as the cock to see which groups best. If starting with the heavy side is closer to the static spine and works better I'm all for it.
I do remember one time you were wrong.......remember.....that time you thought you were mistaken?

Paul

[newbie]

Paul i have seen you shoot and you need every bit of help you can get from your arrows
wait or was that Derrick
It won't help my shooting at all

JMHO if you want close whats the point? I think the best is to break down and but the RAM or make your own(you need more toys anyway ). I think too many variables for a bath to be accurate as a RAM. I understand why it may be close but then i think why waste your time if you still have to go through shooting and rotating?

[racking up points]

Paul i have seen you shoot and you need every bit of help you can get from your arrows
wait or was that Derrick
It won't help my shooting at all

JMHO if you want close whats the point? I think the best is to break down and but the RAM or make your own(you need more toys anyway ). I think too many variables for a bath to be accurate as a RAM. I understand why it may be close but then i think why waste your time if you still have to go through shooting and rotating?

It's an interesting test, I'd like to see how accurate the method is.

But here is what I would like to see tested. Which is more critical to long range accuracy, spine indexing or sorting shafts by deflection?

Essentially, we are splitting hairs here because Zombies and Tapps are very stiff and the benefits of spine indexing are only noticed at extended ranges. Sorting shafts by deflection is probably just as important as spine indexing and the bubbles won't tell that tale.

[Hi5]

...............Sorting shafts by deflection is probably just as important as spine indexing and the bubbles won't tell that tale.

Bubbles in the bath water??
What kind of testing are you guys doing, anyway?

[paulaboutform]

Paul i have seen you shoot and you need every bit of help you can get from your arrows
wait or was that Derrick
It won't help my shooting at all

JMHO if you want close whats the point? I think the best is to break down and but the RAM or make your own(you need more toys anyway ). I think too many variables for a bath to be accurate as a RAM. I understand why it may be close but then i think why waste your time if you still have to go through shooting and rotating?

It's an interesting test, I'd like to see how accurate the method is.

But here is what I would like to see tested. Which is more critical to long range accuracy, spine indexing or sorting shafts by deflection?

Essentially, we are splitting hairs here because Zombies and Tapps are very stiff and the benefits of spine indexing are only noticed at extended ranges. Sorting shafts by deflection is probably just as important as spine indexing and the bubbles won't tell that tale.

Great point Derrick, I agree 100%! That's where the ram tester will shine. You can spine index and spine/deflection match your arrows. Understanding that you may only end up with 7-8 matched arrows in a dozen...if you're lucky. Or, you can pay the extra deñeros for the fully matched arrows.
Mike, you're a trouble maker that's always finding ways to spend my money!

Paul

[newbie]

My expert marksmanship couldn't tell the difference with the zombies nor the tapps.... i just now fletch and be done with it and no wasted expensive bathwater
You guys may notice the difference but ill be honest i dont nor can shoot as good at your long range. I also dont have any rockets in my pocket....

[taz3]

Is it best to locate and index prior to cutting the shafts down to size or is it better to cut to size then proceed?

[rein1]

My expert marksmanship couldn't tell the difference with the zombies nor the tapps.... i just now fletch and be done with it and no wasted expensive bathwater
You guys may notice the difference but ill be honest i dont nor can shoot as good at your long range. I also dont have any rockets in my pocket....

X2 on that,,, I've been reassured the only difference between zombies and tapps, Tapps are made for south shore..

[wildcatter]

weight and deflection tolerances are the only difference in tapps and zombies. The Tapps are sold in tighter tolerance sets whether you buy 6 or 60 when buying without paying extra for weight and deflection matching, the tapps would be closer matched in this instance.

But if you want the tightest matched set's and pay the extra for that minimum weight and deflection matching, you would be getting the same arrow quality, either could have the the slightly stiffer deflection, it would very from set to set, but both would have the same tolerance going this route.

And I agree,, the matching the amount of deflection can make just as much difference as plain indexing, and will be more obvious on the heavier poundage curves than any other bow in my experience. I have faster compounds, that don't show as much difference in shot to shot with weaker spine, or with more deflection difference, but these high poundage recurves will show any arrow variance in my experience.

But even the water indexing helps, the more we can get every arrow to being identical the more consistent they will shoot with each other and the longer the range, the more obvious it will be. Out to 40 yards,,, hell anything I can feed em will put venison on the table,, but what else have I got to do but make meaningless improvements on my perfect hunting riggs????