carbon arrows. Should there be a helical pattern for vanes on Carbon arrows?
Question:
Hi: Someone please help. Up to this point in the hobby of archery, I have always bought aluminum arrow. They have always come with a helical vane pattern. I decided to try some cheap carbon from Cabela becasue the price was right $50/ doz. The carbons are called Cabella SST. They have external components. The arrows came today and lo and behold, there is no helical vane pattern. My Question is, should I get helical pattern vanes for carbons? Or are carbons so thin that even for hunting (I am going to use 100 grain spitfire mechanical broad heads), one does not need the helicals? When I ordered from cabela, I just took it for granted that the arrows would have helical vanes. The arrows I got are 30 inches and it is for a 75 lb pull round wheeled Hoyt Raider, and they turned out to have straight vanes. Are straight vanes and helical vanes not that much different when it comes to carbon arrows? I am going to be using these for hunting deers. Thankyou in advance. cheers. Share what you know. Learn what you don’t.
Response:
Carbon shafts are so thin, that helical might acuatlyl disrupt the flight. Remember vanes (or feather or whatever you use) are there to stablize the arrow due to little thigns in our form that aren’t so great. IF we had perfect form, no one would NEED vanes and we could all shoot bareshafts with total control. But we can not thus we use vanes to stablize the arrow faster. Fletching set helical acuatlly stablize faster, but on a thin carbon shaft, it wouldnt’ work. If you want the equivalent of a helical fletch, try some spin wings. I don’t like em, but most people do. Han Su Kim
Response:
|> Carbon shafts are so thin, that helical might acuatlyl disrupt the flight. |> |> Remember vanes (or feather or whatever you use) are there to stablize the |> arrow due to little thigns in our form that aren’t so great. IF we had |> perfect form, no one would NEED vanes and we could all shoot bareshafts with |> total control. Shooting broadheads without fletching of some sort is probably a very bad idea, even if you had perfect form. Remember that the important parameter is the distance between the center of pressure and the center of gravity of arrow. the center of pressure must be behind the center of gravity, and the greater this distance is, the better the "stability" of the arrow. The surface area of a broadhead might move the center of pressure ahead of the center of gravity. Helical fletching moves the center of pressure away from the point more than the same size fletching put on straight. Of course the arrow will have more drag and will fly more slowly than the straight fletched arrow. |> But we can not thus we use vanes to stablize the arrow faster. Fletching |> set helical acuatlly stablize faster, but on a thin carbon shaft, it |> wouldnt’ work. If you want the equivalent of a helical fletch, try some |> spin wings. I don’t like em, but most people do. If you can secure the helical fletching to the shaft, helical fletching would certainly work.. Some FITA target shooters have used regular vanes with a helical clamp on their ACE’s and X10’s with good results. I think that the major advantage of spin wings is not how fast they make the arrows spin, but that they react much better in wind. Rather than forcing the fletching aside, some of the force causes the arrow to spin faster. The net result is that there is less sideways force on the arrow with spin wings. Marty Sasaki
Response:
Marty – Help me out here with the concept… when performing paper "tuning", grouping of fletched arrows are compared directly to unfletched arrows’ grouping in where they impact the target. The diagrams for paper tuning show the unfletched arrows grouping tightly just like the fletched arrows albeit in a different place on the target. I therefore surmise that the primary reason (but surely not the ONLY reason!) for fletching nowadays is to provide a consistency in flight when the air is moving against the path of the arrow, to nullify the variable of airflow(wind). IOW, isn’t the sheer consistency of performance now attainable due to the consistency in highly careful manufacturing of shafts, points, nocks, strings, limbs, risers, and the use of stabilizers, doinkers, clickers, plungers, et al , hasn’t this contributed to a neutralization of variables that fletching was once necessary to compensate for. How new is the concept of tuning in the sport of archery, I wonder…. ? And after all, isn’t minnowing, porpoising, and fishtailing (doncha just love the fishy terms used in describing arrow flight characteristics?) indicative of problems with the bow, rather than the arrow, problems which fletching will not mitigate? I’d guess (as a nearly completely novice archery parent) that fletching is still desirable or perhaps even necessary, especially in outdoor tournaments, but exactly how important do _you_ think fletching is? Are there any studies about the necessity of fletching with the high tech carbon shafts used these days? If you were to divide every aspect of delivering an arrow to the target into 100, what percent of the total is fletching ? ARC in Lago Vista, TX If there are no stupid questions, then what sort of questions do stupid people ask? – Dogbert
> |> Carbon shafts are so thin, that helical might acuatlyl disrupt the flight. > |> > |> Remember vanes (or feather or whatever you use) are there to stablize the > |> arrow due to little thigns in our form that aren’t so great. IF we had > |> perfect form, no one would NEED vanes and we could all shoot bareshafts with > |> total control. > Shooting broadheads without fletching of some sort is probably a very bad
idea, even if you had perfect > form. Remember that the important parameter is the distance between the
center of pressure and the > center of gravity of arrow. the center of pressure must be behind the
center of gravity, and the greater > this distance is, the better the "stability" of the arrow. The surface
area of a broadhead might move the > center of pressure ahead of the center of gravity. > Helical fletching moves the center of pressure away from the point more
than the same size fletching put > on straight. Of course the arrow will have more drag and will fly more
slowly than the straight fletched > arrow. > |> But we can not thus we use vanes to stablize the arrow faster. Fletching > |> set helical acuatlly stablize faster, but on a thin carbon shaft, it > |> wouldnt’ work. If you want the equivalent of a helical fletch, try some > |> spin wings. I don’t like em, but most people do. > If you can secure the helical fletching to the shaft, helical fletching
would certainly work.. Some FITA > target shooters have used regular vanes with a helical clamp on their
ACE’s and X10’s with good results. > I think that the major advantage of spin wings is not how fast they make
the arrows spin, but that they > react much better in wind. Rather than forcing the fletching aside, some
of the force causes the arrow to > spin faster. The net result is that there is less sideways force on the
arrow with spin wings. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Marty Sasaki
Response:
Gotta add my 2 cents on this one. > Marty – Help me out here with the concept… when performing paper > "tuning", grouping of fletched arrows are compared directly to unfletched > arrows’ grouping in where they impact the target. The diagrams for paper > tuning show the unfletched arrows grouping tightly just like the fletched > arrows albeit in a different place on the target. I therefore surmise > that the primary reason (but surely not the ONLY reason!) for fletching > nowadays is to provide a consistency in flight when the air is moving > against the path of the arrow, to nullify the variable of airflow(wind).
THis sounds more like your doing some bareshaft tuning, where you shoot fletched arrows and some unfletched arrows and see what’s going on. I personally just go shoot a tight group and shoot some bareshafts and if they land smack in the middle of the group doing the same thing I did with my fletched arrows, my bow is shootable and very close to being 100 percent tuned (which is never for me hahaah inside joke). Reason being is I know my bow will shoot straight with or without any fletching telling me it is at the point where it is the most forgiving and my groups will stay tight even if I’m a little loose. That’s what I think the point of tuning is, making the bow the more forgiving at can be so that your groups still stay relatively tight even when your form gets a little sloppy. Getting off the topic, PAPER tuning is when you shoot FLETCHED arrows through a piece of tight paper on a frame and examine the hole it made. If the hole is like a bullet hold, then the bow is tuned because it’s shooting straight. If it’s tears left or right or up or down, you gotta make some adjustments. > IOW, isn’t the sheer consistency of performance now attainable due to the > consistency in highly careful manufacturing of shafts, points, nocks, > strings, limbs, risers, and the use of stabilizers, doinkers, clickers, > plungers, et al , hasn’t this contributed to a neutralization of variables > that fletching was once necessary to compensate for. How new is the > concept of tuning in the sport of archery, I wonder…. ? And after all, > isn’t minnowing, porpoising, and fishtailing (doncha just love the fishy > terms used in describing arrow flight characteristics?) indicative of > problems with the bow, rather than the arrow, problems which fletching will > not mitigate?
I dont’ know how new the concept of tuning is, but I’m assuming it’s as old as the berger button and the nocking point honestly. Even older. Sure everything is high tech and if you put all this high tech stuff in a robot that was TRAINED to do everything highly consistently, it would be breaking nocks and shafts all day long. The equipment out there shoots better than we do as some people like to say. Still WE are human. WE STILL need to shoot with fletching because we CAN can sloopy. I remember indoors I used to train only bare shafts because it was so unforgiving and really got my act together quickly form wise, but I would ALWAYS want to shoot something with fletching on it. It doesn’t mean I’m gonna get a hire score, but it does mean it’s gonna smooth out the little inconsistencies from shot to shot I have. > I’d guess (as a nearly completely novice archery parent) that fletching is > still desirable or perhaps even necessary, especially in outdoor > tournaments, but exactly how important do _you_ think fletching is? Are > there any studies about the necessity of fletching with the high tech carbon > shafts used these days? If you were to divide every aspect of delivering an > arrow to the target into 100, what percent of the total is fletching ?
I remember one tournament though I had inconsistent flecthing (SPIN WINGS that were put on my me when I wasn’t doing to so well and I wasn’t feeling well when I did it, sniff too much glue I guess haha) and midway through at 30 meters, I RIPPED each and ever vanes off and shot them BARE SHAFT but I had better groups with them ripped off then I did with them ON that day, but only because I did it wrong. If these things were on correctly, I would have probably done MUCH better. As for answering this question, I dont’ know if anyone has done any studies on this. Fletching though I think is VERY important. It not only smoothes things out, but also gives you better flight in the air then without it. AS for out of a hundred I can’t say, but the first thing to me is an arrow that is spined and weighted consistenty to each other in the group. Then would be the fletchings are consistent in my head. Han Su Kim – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> ARC in Lago Vista, TX > If there are no stupid questions, then what sort of questions do stupid > people ask? – Dogbert > |> Carbon shafts are so thin, that helical might acuatlyl disrupt the > flight. > |> > |> Remember vanes (or feather or whatever you use) are there to stablize > the > |> arrow due to little thigns in our form that aren’t so great. IF we had > |> perfect form, no one would NEED vanes and we could all shoot bareshafts > with > |> total control. > Shooting broadheads without fletching of some sort is probably a very bad > idea, even if you had perfect > form. Remember that the important parameter is the distance between the > center of pressure and the > center of gravity of arrow. the center of pressure must be behind the > center of gravity, and the greater > this distance is, the better the "stability" of the arrow. The surface > area of a broadhead might move the > center of pressure ahead of the center of gravity. > Helical fletching moves the center of pressure away from the point more > than the same size fletching put > on straight. Of course the arrow will have more drag and will fly more > slowly than the straight fletched > arrow. > |> But we can not thus we use vanes to stablize the arrow faster. > Fletching > |> set helical acuatlly stablize faster, but on a thin carbon shaft, it > |> wouldnt’ work. If you want the equivalent of a helical fletch, try > some > |> spin wings. I don’t like em, but most people do. > If you can secure the helical fletching to the shaft, helical fletching > would certainly work.. Some FITA > target shooters have used regular vanes with a helical clamp on their > ACE’s and X10’s with good results. > I think that the major advantage of spin wings is not how fast they make > the arrows spin, but that they > react much better in wind. Rather than forcing the fletching aside, some > of the force causes the arrow to > spin faster. The net result is that there is less sideways force on the > arrow with spin wings. > Marty Sasaki
Response:
Han Su Kim, thanks…. — ARC in Lago Vista, TX I don’t care what anybody says, "Planet of the Apes" is unrealistic. Any scientist will tell you that on a planet full of monkeys, someone’s throwing some feces. (David James) – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> Gotta add my 2 cents on this one. > Marty – Help me out here with the concept… when performing paper > "tuning", grouping of fletched arrows are compared directly to unfletched > arrows’ grouping in where they impact the target. The diagrams for paper > tuning show the unfletched arrows grouping tightly just like the fletched > arrows albeit in a different place on the target. I therefore surmise > that the primary reason (but surely not the ONLY reason!) for fletching > nowadays is to provide a consistency in flight when the air is moving > against the path of the arrow, to nullify the variable of airflow(wind). > THis sounds more like your doing some bareshaft tuning, where you shoot > fletched arrows and some unfletched arrows and see what’s going on. I > personally just go shoot a tight group and shoot some bareshafts and if they > land smack in the middle of the group doing the same thing I did with my > fletched arrows, my bow is shootable and very close to being 100 percent > tuned (which is never for me hahaah inside joke). Reason being is I know my > bow will shoot straight with or without any fletching telling me it is at > the point where it is the most forgiving and my groups will stay tight even > if I’m a little loose. That’s what I think the point of tuning is, making > the bow the more forgiving at can be so that your groups still stay > relatively tight even when your form gets a little sloppy. Getting off the > topic, PAPER tuning is when you shoot FLETCHED arrows through a piece of > tight paper on a frame and examine the hole it made. If the hole is like a > bullet hold, then the bow is tuned because it’s shooting straight. If it’s > tears left or right or up or down, you gotta make some adjustments. > IOW, isn’t the sheer consistency of performance now attainable due to > the > consistency in highly careful manufacturing of shafts, points, nocks, > strings, limbs, risers, and the use of stabilizers, doinkers, clickers, > plungers, et al , hasn’t this contributed to a neutralization of > variables > that fletching was once necessary to compensate for. How new is the > concept of tuning in the sport of archery, I wonder…. ? And after > all, > isn’t minnowing, porpoising, and fishtailing (doncha just love the fishy > terms used in describing arrow flight characteristics?) indicative of > problems with the bow, rather than the arrow, problems which fletching > will > not mitigate? > I dont’ know how new the concept of tuning is, but I’m assuming it’s as old > as the berger button and the nocking point honestly. Even older. Sure > everything is high tech and if you put all this high tech stuff in a robot > that was TRAINED to do everything highly consistently, it would be breaking > nocks and shafts all day long. The equipment out there shoots better than > we do as some people like to say. Still WE are human. WE STILL need to > shoot with fletching because we CAN can sloopy. I remember indoors I used > to train only bare shafts because it was so unforgiving and really got my > act together quickly form wise, but I would ALWAYS want to shoot something > with fletching on it. It doesn’t mean I’m gonna get a hire score, but it > does mean it’s gonna smooth out the little inconsistencies from shot to shot > I have. > I’d guess (as a nearly completely novice archery parent) that fletching is > still desirable or perhaps even necessary, especially in outdoor > tournaments, but exactly how important do _you_ think fletching is? Are > there any studies about the necessity of fletching with the high tech > carbon > shafts used these days? If you were to divide every aspect of delivering > an > arrow to the target into 100, what percent of the total is fletching ? > I remember one tournament though I had inconsistent flecthing (SPIN WINGS > that were put on my me when I wasn’t doing to so well and I wasn’t feeling > well when I did it, sniff too much glue I guess haha) and midway through at > 30 meters, I RIPPED each and ever vanes off and shot them BARE SHAFT but I > had better groups with them ripped off then I did with them ON that day, but > only because I did it wrong. If these things were on correctly, I would > have probably done MUCH better. As for answering this question, I dont’ > know if anyone has done any studies on this. Fletching though I think is > VERY important. It not only smoothes things out, but also gives you better > flight in the air then without it. AS for out of a hundred I can’t say, but > the first thing to me is an arrow that is spined and weighted consistenty to > each other in the group. Then would be the fletchings are consistent in my > head. > Han Su Kim > ARC in Lago Vista, TX > If there are no stupid questions, then what sort of questions do stupid > people ask? – Dogbert > > |> Carbon shafts are so thin, that helical might acuatlyl disrupt the > flight. > > |> > > |> Remember vanes (or feather or whatever you use) are there to stablize > the > > |> arrow due to little thigns in our form that aren’t so great. IF we > had > > |> perfect form, no one would NEED vanes and we could all shoot > bareshafts > with > > |> total control. > > Shooting broadheads without fletching of some sort is probably a very > bad > idea, even if you had perfect > > form. Remember that the important parameter is the distance between the > center of pressure and the > > center of gravity of arrow. the center of pressure must be behind the > center of gravity, and the greater > > this distance is, the better the "stability" of the arrow. The surface > area of a broadhead might move the > > center of pressure ahead of the center of gravity. > > Helical fletching moves the center of pressure away from the point more > than the same size fletching put > > on straight. Of course the arrow will have more drag and will fly more > slowly than the straight fletched > > arrow. > > |> But we can not thus we use vanes to stablize the arrow faster. > Fletching > > |> set helical acuatlly stablize faster, but on a thin carbon shaft, it > > |> wouldnt’ work. If you want the equivalent of a helical fletch, try > some > > |> spin wings. I don’t like em, but most people do. > > If you can secure the helical fletching to the shaft, helical fletching > would certainly work.. Some FITA > > target shooters have used regular vanes with a helical clamp on their > ACE’s and X10’s with good results. > > I think that the major advantage of spin wings is not how fast they make > the arrows spin, but that they > > react much better in wind. Rather than forcing the fletching aside, some > of the force causes the arrow to > > spin faster. The net result is that there is less sideways force on the > arrow with spin wings. > > Marty Sasaki
Response:
A helical fletch works great on carbon shafts. I put the most twist possible on my X10’s and ACE’s and the groups only got tighter. It seems to me that the faster the shafts spin the more stable they become.
