[Swamp Phantom]

I just copied this by Matt33 from another thread - " i put my chronograph to work earlier with a 45# recurve and a discovery set at 24# and every shot was within 3-4 fps of each other the speeds ranged from 104 to 110fps "

The results he got are very interesting to me because it cuts through all the guessing about how a specific Bow releases its Energy into the Shaft.

If anyone else has Chronograph results, please add them to this thread. To help with the comparisons, listing the following would really help:

1. Model of Bow
2. Draw Weight when Chronographed
3. Let-Off(on Compounds)
4. Draw Length
5. Total Shaft Weight
6. Distance to the Chronograph from the Bow Hand

Should be real interesting if many of you have had an opportunity to chronograph your equipment.

 

[rum3002576]

cool read

 

[DMC]

Make sure you use a fish arrow not some light wt hunting arrow.

 

[Missouribowfisher]

Nice post. I wonder what a PSE barracuda clocks in at

 

[drumshooter]

Would be interesting to see results from the more popular bows
oneida
cuda
fishhawk
fire eagle
discovery
various recurve draw weights.
i realize that all these do not compare in draw weights, but it would be a good base to work from

 

[Old Bald Guy]

Would be interesting to see results from the more popular bows
oneida
cuda
fishhawk
fire eagle
discovery
various recurve draw weights.
i realize that all these do not compare in draw weights, but it would be a good base to work from

As some of you may remember, and others try to forget, this test was done on the old site with quite a few of the bows available at the time. Same arrow, same shooter, same chrony, same draw weight and same draw length. The Cuda spanked everything with the recurves needing 15-25 extra lbs of draw weight to catch up. Would be interesting to see the test run again since there are a lot of new bowfishing bows out there and the results might be different now. Someone oughta run this test at one of the bigger tourneys where all of the different bows are available.

 

[Gbollom]

Good idea OBG! If anyone has a chronograph or access to one bring it to a tourny and shoot some different bows through it. I would be interested to see the differences. Would also be interesting to see if the carbon or carbon spined arrows picked up any velocity

 

[Swamp Phantom]

As some of you may remember, and others try to forget, this test was done on the old site with quite a few of the bows available at the time. ....

:grin: Any chance someone might have "saved" the Data for those Chronograph Results? That would be an excellent place to start from.

Really like the idea of someone Chronographing the various Bows at a shoot. HUGE amount of Data in a short time span.

 

[Old Bald Guy]

:grin: Any chance someone might have "saved" the Data for those Chronograph Results? That would be an excellent place to start from.

Really like the idea of someone Chronographing the various Bows at a shoot. HUGE amount of Data in a short time span.

Yep and easy to do. One chrony, one scale, one impartial shooter, one arrow with marked draw length and bingo all the my bow sticks fish and yours bounces off threads would be over. With the same arrow faster speed equals more penetration so all the threads could become "my brand X bow is tuned better than your brand Y bow" since "bullethole in the water" tuning would be the only variable.

 

[Carpn]

Yep and easy to do. One chrony, one scale, one impartial shooter, one arrow with marked draw length and bingo all the my bow sticks fish and yours bounces off threads would be over. With the same arrow faster speed equals more penetration so all the threads could become "my brand X bow is tuned better than your brand Y bow" since "bullethole in the water" tuning would be the only variable.

That makes a huge difference in performance...a well tuned bow sticks fish way better than a bow that throws arrows poorly.

 

[Throughthegills]

The old rule of thumb was compounds were 35% more efficient than recurves on average.In this case the Discovery is 47% more efficient if my math is right.