Ask the experts

You ask. The Experts. (Does exactly what it says on the tin).

QCan you tell me the impact of vane stiffness on arrow flight? I don't know if you have any review about these problems showing the advantages and inconveniences of each vane about arrow speed, shock resistance, rotation speed... There are several models of vanes with hard / medium / soft / ultra soft stiffness from elivane / spinwing / xs wing / spider vane / K&K / gaspro and I don't know what to choose. I currently shoot with 2inch medium Gaspro but at each practice I have to refletch one or two arrows at least. The vanes are brittle when shocking each other and it cuts the ligature.

AA spin vane must maintain integrity of shape and structure whilst the arrow is in flight. Upon release the force of the air striking the profile of the vane will start a rifling motion. If the vane is too floppy it will deform under the air pressure and will no longer be able to provide the consistent functions of flight rotation, stabilisation and steering. Vanes also to some degree provide oscillation dampening and still need a degree of flex. Whilst some manufacturers produce vanes in a single material, others choose to offer them in a selection of stiffnesses. This is to attempt to cater for the wide range of power outputs offered by both recurve and compound bows. The rule of thumb is that the higher poundage bows will require the vanes to be a bit stiffer to avoid deformation due to the increased air pressure. For example Gaspro recommend a medium vane up to 45lbs and then a heavy vane up to 60lbs.

That said there are variables to consider. The big one is the arrow diameter. On very thin recurve diameters, Gaspro often recommends a stiffness of “Soft or “Soft+” Elivanes also tend to mirror this philosophy with their products. Like with most other things in archery, there is no substitute for real world testing under strict metrics without variables. Unfortunately most of us will never have access to the high-tech equipment needed to be able to forensically evaluate the different stiffnesses of vanes. Usually it comes down to spending a bit extra and buying two different packets and putting them up against each other to see if there's any discernible difference to groupings or sight marks. As spin vanes tend to come in packs of 50 and above you might be able to get a few from a friend to try out.

Whilst some vanes are more resilient than others, all of them are easily damaged by impacts. Operating arrows with spin vanes and spending time maintaining them go hand in hand. Unfortunately there is no cure for this and if you want to reap the benefits of a spin vane you have to get used to performing post session maintenance. Some vanes are definitely easier to live with than others and are easier to refletch too. Medium and hard stiffness Gaspro vanes can cause a few fletching problems. They have a very tight pre-shaped helix that wants to lift up and away from the arrow. They don't have a dedicated shaped foot to neatly wrap around the radius of the shaft, and they can have quite sharp edges. All of these factors make them more likely to cut through the anchor tape. This doesn't seem to be a problem with the soft variants. It's essential that the anchor tapes are wound around the shaft about three times to resist this. I use 50mm of tape on a small diameter arrow such as an X10 or ACE.

Two makes of vanes that cause far fewer problems are the Spider Vanes and KSL Jet6. The ends of the spider vanes are shaped differently to a lot of others giving an almost dedicated area for the anchor tape. This really helps with consistency of placement and has very little slant allowing the tape to sit flat. I use pretty much all types of spin vanes all of the time on customer arrows. In my experience the KSL Jet6 vanes seat beautifully on the radius of small diameter shafts as they have a proper shaped foot. This allows great contact with the fixing tape due to the increase in surface area. These also don't show a tendency to want to pull away from the shaft. For ease of use, neatness and security, I would have to say that the KSL Jet6 are my favourite to use.

The problem with so much choice is that it leads to option paralysis and the belief that we are missing out on a trick or two. This is turn causes a bit of stress and stops us relaxing both physically and mentally. I'm a huge advocate of sticking with the same set up as much as you can. Changing the smallest things can often lead to a reduction in points scored if only for a temporary period. The archer is capable of scoring more points than the equipment ever is.

ADRIAN TIPPINS

Q

How should I go about fine tuning for the 70 metre distance?

A

Club shooters in general are familiar with bow set up as regards correct limb length choice, specific brace height and associating string length and tiller adjustment, from which they can proceed to the famous bare shaft test. So, as a result, they can come away with an informed bow set-up and a very decent nocking point and cushion plunger tune, which will certainly perform its end of the shot process.

However, elite Olympic level recurvers advance this operation to a degree which is totally married to the 70 metre distance they exclusively compete at. Initially the upper echelon identify the bow poundage and mass weight which conforms with their stabilizer set-up along with a very definitive tiller and string length measurement is transferable from bow to bow, as they are required to utilise sponsor’s latest model updates.

The primary ambition, clearly, is to have your shafts grouping in the best possible circular fashion, as any elongated pattern on a circle fashion, as any elongate pattern on a circle target will cost the archer points. The aim therefore, of a fine-tuning exercise, it to produce perfect circular groups at 70 metres, which on the target in question guarantees the best possible outcome score wise.

Now whether the archer’s group are in fact circular and not elongated either vertically or horizontally (or even both) hinges on the nocking point positioning and the cushion plunger tension respectively.

So the tuning process involves specifically shooting at 70 metres and scrutinising group shapes to ascertain whether in fact the group is circular, which is the desired result, or whether elongation is occurring. For elite recurvers, a circular group of well shot arrows will keep the archer’s shafts in the yellow. If there is either vertical or horizontal elongation, or perhaps both, then despite quality form and execution, arrows at the extremities of that elongated group will yield unwanted 8’s and 7’s which the archer doesn’t deserve.

Olympic level shooters usually choose a quality weather day so no exterior factors such as wind can add variance to the process. Repetitive groups of quite high arrow numbers are shot so a clear pattern emerges at the target. If the shooter is really blessed then the required circular grouping can result.

So if the resulting is vertically elongated the nocking point placement is not perfectly positioned to attain maximum circular grouping at 70 metres. Now a very minute adjustment needs to be made, and further group shooting employed to plot the improving shape, until the desired circular pattern eventuates. Obviously, this takes time and patience because there is no way of telling initially whether a slightly higher or lower nocking point will produce the result being sought. So if you are unlucky, then you may not get it right at the outset, because the amount you move may be too much or too little, and you may be moving in the wrong direction! Secondly, if the original grouping exercise produces a horizontally elongated pattern, then the fault lies with the plunger tension. So once again, the plan is to work through the grouping effort with a slight increase or decrease in that tension, until that circular pattern corrects itself into a circle.

Logically it is more than possible the elongated initial grouping may be canted at an angle between horizontal and vertical. As a result an even more patient shooting of arrow groups becomes a necessity, in order to accommodate both contingencies.

The whole endeavour at best does take time and patience, and if both horizontal and vertical elongation is present then considerable arrow volume becomes necessary in order to reach the corrected goal.

This whole process is very definitive for top level recurvers because the diameter of their groupings is far superior to the aspiring competitor. This is not to say that the regular club recurver cannot undergo this assignment and with patience attain a marked upgrade in his, or her, grouping. Because we shoot at a circular target, the more circular your group, the more points you are able to retrieve. Over a particular round, at a specific distance, even at club level, the score improvement can be significant over a number of ends.

But the best option for many club archers would be to select a mid range around the 35 to 40 metre mark, and work from there. It can still give you a tune which will improve your overall scoring. Top level shooters need that very definitive edge at 70 metres, but working at a middle range still provides enough to make the effort required worthwhile for next level competitors. As I’ve underlined repeatedly, it is initially a quite taxing proposition to be shooting quite high arrow volumes, and assessing group shapes, and fiddling with quite minute adjustments, but once completed, the score benefit from well formed circular grouping is very rewarding, and subsequent checks on new bow purchases are much less time consuming.

ROY ROSE