Arrows: Results: ACC @ 90m....

[tel]

just been trawling my records and I was shooting 100yds with ACCs a while back...sight the right way round, 68" bow, Petron carbons,40lb on the pinkies. Can't remember the actual arrow spec - I'll ask George.

[Big Dave]

You both have the equipment to hit 90m it's all in how you shoot.
I have 36# Border CXG limbs getting 39-40# on the fingers and 30" navs had problems hitting 90m well hitting the legs or edge of the paper. sight reversed.

I went through my form with my coach I have changed my stance, bow shoulder position and added a clicker and bingo 90m and grouping. and the form changes increased my draw by about 1/2 an inch and upped poundage to 42" on fingers. I have turned up my limbs a little. also my sight is half way in and still have 1 cm left on the rail.

I take it the arrows are falling in front of the target and its not just you guys missing compleatly?

[MarkH]

Here are some interesting points to muse over, but not exhaustive:

ACE are only around 22 grains less than ACC (3-40 to 570) for 29" shaft.

8125 weights around 3grains per strand, 12 grains for 3 strands. This is not directly related to arrow weight as it is distributed, not all at the arrow nock point, but will help slightly.

2 brass nock points + kisser = 12grains

Spin wings (1 3/4") = 0.7grains Platifletch 2 3/4" = 6.8grains each

If you reduce point weight by 20 grains (80 instead of 100) and ignore tuning for moment, reduce string strands to 14 (around 5 grains), change to spin wings to reduce fletching weight (up to -20grains), tie-on thread nock points (possible -10grains), total reduction around 55 grains. This is significantly less than ACEs alone. However transfer all this to spinwings then you get around 75 grains reduction compared to an ACC with plastic fletching plus all the other junk.

Add to that a little higher tab shelf (if using one), if I recall correctly 1mm on the sight aprox = 10cm at 90m (but don't quote me on that one).

Answer - No idea. You have to shoot them!

Personally I would nip along to a retailer that offers trial/tuning before you buy arrows. I certainly know Perris Archery offer a £25 deposit for you to try different arrows, spines, point weights etc. When (if) you buy they take off the £25 quid. Brilliant.

[Bird_2112]

Get an Angel Majesty string.. that will lift the sight mark as well.

[bkupris]

Do yourself a favour and get a set of ACE's

[geoffk]

I think my friend is going to buy ACEs, the local shop have done a sale or return deal on being able to hit 90m with them!

I want ACEs now...

Will use my ACCs for the rest of the season though, ready to trash them indoors, so maybe early next year for ACEs for me.

[Tony_zelah]

I know of a number of archers who shoot at targets set at 100 yards using a longbow and wooden arrows. So if arrows made of wood can reach the distance, I'm sure any of the ones mentioned will. My suggestion would be save your money and check your technique and bow set up are right

[tak160]

Originally Posted by Ffish

Why not consider getting Navigators? Much lighter than ACCs and much cheaper than ACEs. For around £150 you'll get a full set.

My setup:

68" bow
40lbs on the fingers
29" draw length
610 Nav's with 90grn ACE inserts

And I can reach 90m /100yds with no difficulty at all, without the sight right in, or right down.

A clean release and follow-through always help too, but that's a form issue, not an equipment issue

Hey, I have a 68" bow too with just a bit more than 40# on my fingers but with 3 inches less draw length. But i'm using 710 navs with 120grn inserts in order to tune my arrows (limbs have to be wound all the way in). Do your arrows tune properly with just 90grn points in?
I can just about reach 90m but not without winding my sight right in and all the way down. I was hoping that maybe if I changed the point to a lighter one, it might improve my sight marks but then my arrows will act too stiff and there's no way I can tune them without a new string. I'm stumped on why I need such a heavy point weight to tune them (might be because I have cheap limbs actually).

[Kelux]

Originally Posted by Harrison Ooi

Easy fix, take out your sight, put it the wrong way round,and then try.You should hit 90m. If not,aim the flags on top of the target butts. If you still can't reach 90m, wind in the limb bolts. If all else fails, check your release, only then would you need to change equipment.

I agree put the sight in wrong way round so that will be beetween the riser and the string

[Rhys]

You could borrow my huge chin, it gives fantastic sightmarks . . . .

[Harrison Ooi]

Originally Posted by geoffk

I think my friend is going to buy ACEs, the local shop have done a sale or return deal on being able to hit 90m with them!

I want ACEs now...

Will use my ACCs for the rest of the season though, ready to trash them indoors, so maybe early next year for ACEs for me.

I think if you spent more time working on form(no ill intentions,mate.Even world and olympic champions need to do it too!) , it would save you money AND earn you points,many more than all the money in the world could buy.

Originally Posted by Tony_zelah

I know of a number of archers who shoot at targets set at 100 yards using a longbow and wooden arrows. So if arrows made of wood can reach the distance, I'm sure any of the ones mentioned will. My suggestion would be save your money and check your technique and bow set up are right

Just like what Tony said.

Originally Posted by Rhys

You could borrow my huge chin, it gives fantastic sightmarks . . . .

Does it really make a big difference?

[Whitehart]

Having seen a few similar set ups this month (hopefully not a new trend) make sure your nocking point is not too high and I am not talking about just a mm, this kills sight marks.

[moo-mop]

Originally Posted by Harrison Ooi

I think if you spent more time working on form(no ill intentions,mate.Even world and olympic champions need to do it too!), it would save you money AND earn you points,many more than all the money in the world could buy.

I think it is not so simple.

When I shot I always split up archery into an overriding goal (XXX FITA score in average conditions) and then a number of sub-goals. Some sub-goals are technique based (e.g. for me two sub-goals one on the technique model and on the ability to perform that technique model) but I also had goals based on strength and optimal equipment. Yes I too, personally, considered the first two my more important goals. However, I think no amount of working on form or tuning (unless something is very off) will gain you much sight mark if you have a lighter bow and heavier arrows and a short draw-length and face etc etc. So, in this case given considering the change (ACC to ACE) will make a significant difference to sight-mark (provided the bow is set-up OKish, doesn't have to be great) without the need to pull more I can understand why this could be a priority.

Everybody has to set their own goals. For some people an overriding goal might involve shooting 90m - and they want to do that with a proper recurve sight set-up (not reversed, not just aim at the sky and hope). Maybe the archer has the ability, but does not want to do strength training, as it is not necessary with certain kit (maybe they risk injury, maybe they just don't like weights etc).
As only the archer themselves, with advice from the coach, can decide in this case I would respect a decision to change kit as well as a decision not to. I'm pretty sure no world and Olympic champions wouldn't set proprieties in what they work on first in order to achieve their aims, and surely it does work just the same with lower goals.