A slo-mo illustration would be awesome!!!

I was thinking the same, the tape had nothing to do with aero dynamics but the dynamic spine should change, after bare shafting with and without tape I barely saw a difference, so I just do it without tape

It does. It also changes your foc. Probably doesn't matter unless you are competing in the olympics or vegas.

Whats the point of shooting a bareshaft if its completely different in spine and foc compared to the fletched arrow?

A wrap or fletchings or tape lol is not going to change the spine, I’ve put wraps on trying to change the spine and it does nothing

@@garrettstraffon608 Thats nonsense. Adding weight in the front changes spine and same does adding weight in the back.

apply broadhead to your arrow. With tape. You understand more than about 99% of bowhunters. So the aerodynamic contradiction is adding a broadhead. Lift. The tape will not improve the launch condition. So, perfect bare shaft. Apply lifting mechanism to back, vanes, add lifting mechanism to front, offset the two is the goal HOWEVER, if you don't bare shaft, then the launch condition might be a "little off". ( you know this, it could bend in 360 degree circle) then you add lift to front and lift to back on an arrow launching a "little off".......will tape resolve?

Uh, this guy is trying to simplify the process. Aerodynamics vs "tape myth"

"the aerodynamic principle of vanes, while the arrow is flying, has no correlation to the "mass added".

@@RanchFairy Yes, the *aerodynamic* action of the vanes has nothing to do with the mass of the vanes, but they do have mass. Just like the action of the nock itself has nothing to do with the mass of the nock, but the nock does have mass. As the arrow first begins to flex upon release of the string, the aerodynamic properties of the vanes have little to no impact on the flexing of the arrow. The lift force from the vanes dampens the oscillations over several periods of oscillation "while the arrow is flying". While the arrow is still in contact with the string, the initial amplitude of those oscillations is strongly influenced by small changes in the nock weight.

@@ThirdLawPair Nice. And the amplitude changes at launch by nock position i.e. where the shaft wants to bend and what direction. That's why nock tuning is solid. So we are off the rails. Vanes lift and drag. Tape does very little of those two things. Very different flight / aerodynamic mechanism. If you want to discuss static margin, that is fine. But an unstable bare shaft can be masked with vanes and made to look like a clean tear. Apply fixed blade broadhead, especially to an underspined arrow that experiences a huge bend at launch, we see the complaints in all of archery that "fixed won't fly".

@@RanchFairy The tape isn't supposed to lift or drag. The whole point of bareshafting is to observe the ocillatory effects on how the arrow flies without the aerodynamic lift and drag effects of the vanes. But after you are done doing that test, you are going to put the vanes back on again, which will influence the launch amplitude before they have any aerodynemaic effects. The point is to precisely reproduce the exact same amplitude at launch as you would have if the mass (mass is a much better term than weight here) of the vanes was there. The question you should be asking is if those 16 grains have enough effect on launch amplitude to matter. You are the tuning guy, and your motto is to go out and test it. I would be curious to see what happens.

@@ThirdLawPair We can put it on the list. But you are way, way, ahead of 99% of people where this literally doesn't matter. So, yes, this may be a factor. Here's the skinny. If a person takes all 12 or 100 arrows with no tape and bare shaft / nock tunes them all. Then the whole set of arrows is extremely consistent, at launch. Add vanes, the initial launch conditions, bare shaft, make them consistent. So the tape doesn't make a big difference. Secondarily, the aerodynamic principle of how vanes work as wind goes across them is incredibly different than any bare shaft condition. Solid comment.

Thats the point "the aerodynamic principle of vanes, while the arrow is flying, has no correlation to the "mass added".

I guess people on the message boards think so. But "the aerodynamic principle of vanes, while the arrow is flying, has no correlation to the "mass added".

Man, Im sorry you missed this. THE AERODYNAMIC effect of the vanes is so different from the mass of the tape they do NOT CORRELATE. Nothing to do with spine. Message board hammer heads have you all wrapped around the axles.

Interesting I went thru the process with bare shaft and broad heads shot the same as my feild point

If your string is directly behind the center of the arrow (bow is tuned) some variation in weight on the back side will have little to no affect. This is assuming you are spined correctly. If you are pushing the boundary at either end of the spine spectrum, you could see variation.

I got six minutes and twelve seconds in before I realized that this video was nonsense.

It wasn’t him trying to convince you why the tape should work

🤣

"the aerodynamic principle of vanes, while the arrow is flying, has no correlation to the "mass added".

Yes

I'd say yes and add that many lighted nocks are different NOCKS, than stock and that can be a big change.

Now we get somewhere! Bare shaft creates consistent launch conditions for the whole set of arrows. Then vanes further correct any mistakes you might make shooting. Broadheads have lift (and drag). Much different than a field point which is the lowest lift / drag point. Solid.

The idiot in this video did say "if it works, ok, that's fine". But "the aerodynamic principle of vanes, while the arrow is flying, has no correlation to the "mass added".

The massive aerodynamic principles behind drag and lift are COMPLETELY different from the "mass" addition. No correlation.

​@@RanchFairyEnglish is not my native language, but i guess i am beginning to understand what you are meaning.

The fletching "weight" compensated by tape weight has no correlation to how the fletching "works" in flight via lift. So the extra weight is irrelevant.

But what about the change in FOC and static spine of the arrow? Stripping the vanes off if you run 4 max stealth that’s about 32-36 grains difference. That’s making your FOC go up a couple percent and also making the spine weaker. In theory, the bareshaft shouldn’t come off the bow exactly as the broadhead would

@@justinrodabaugh3746 The aerodynamic lift of vanes (the way they work) does not correlate the the stability of flying a bare shaft stick. Bare shaft creates consistent launch conditions for the whole set of arrows. Then vanes further correct any mistakes you might make shooting.

😂

Lmao.

Knock tune with vanes on , so everything is the way it's going to be hunted.🤔🤔

@@afidbhawkins3173 nock tuning is great for spine indexing bare shaft tells you if your vanes need left or right offsets or helix and how much. Comes when you bring it all together. So bare shaft shot is absolutely perfect you put a right offset vanes on and it goes out of whack put left on and it goes to even more perfect than bare shaft. With vertical you cant skip steps you have to do it all. Crossbow you can skip depending on the crossbow and shafts.

completely missed the video. The vanes function is a lifting device (this is aerodynamic) Adding mass to the back of the arrow, which is not a lifting device, has nothing to do with the aerodynamic function of the tape vs vanes.

Well, he never said that. The idiot in this video clearly said "the aerodynamic principle of vanes, while the arrow is flying, has no correlation to the "mass added". But, hey, listening and reading are new skills.

It was an exaggeration. I was making a point that the aerodynamic principle doesn't matter because that's not what people put tape on for. It's not for anything related to shooting a distance. Therefore comparing it to the flight characteristics of vanes is a mute point. It's for paper tuning with a more apples to apples arrow. I thought there would be a point in the video that applied to that. Big fan of your stuff but I couldn't find any useful info out of this video. Maybe I'm to dumb to understand it idk.

Ii make my own arrows for my Recurve. Late winter, this is what I'm doing. I shoot an ILF Recurve. This way I can shoot different limbs with different arrows. I have arrows that shoot just O.K. off a set of lower quality limbs. Another set of limbs that don't stack @ the end of the draw shoot the arrows better. It's all to do with the spine. Another set of arrows that I made to hunt with this season needed limbs that were CNC Machined carbon to get the energy to get perfect flight. I started testing in March & after bare shaft only shooting I was getting the results that I needed for maximum efficiency. It's a little like not having enough motor power to get a relatively heavy boat to plane. Until I had the right limbs I didn't get perfect arrow flight with a bare shaft. So u can learn shooting bare shafts that if they had three 4" feathers on them I would have never known. P.S. I do put 1/4" tape strips just in front of my fletches. They go around the shaft about 3 revolutions. I put another one just in front of the 1st. They r called Turbulators. They help with turbulence that exists in certain situations.

@@josephtreadlightly5686 See my traditional bow tuning video. You could make arrow sets that fly for all the limbs. I THINK, but don't know, that you have the same arrow and you changed limb draw weight then found a match?

@@RanchFairy Carbon quality & structural integrity especially with a 4mm arrow matters. The high quality carbon that Black Eagle offers is exceptional in weight & construction. It's also the perfect dimensions that the heavy steel outserts by Valkyrie caters too. Bare shafting with the 50 lb. limbs couldn't have gone better.

Similarly I’ve found that some arrows, but not all, tuned well out of a decently tuned bow will still fly like darts even if you have to crank ten pounds off because you forgot to practice all spring. But nobody I know did that, I just found out for no reason… I am a believer in that window of forgiveness you’re talking about now that I’ve see it.

@@jcarry5214 very interesting because I was talking about tuning arrows for recurve which the arrow is the forgiveness and you're getting results for tuning the bow being the forgiveness in a compound. I'll remember that should I need it!

@@nicetryb0z0 Interesting, I didn't realize you were talking about stickbows but yeah I'm finding the same thing you are, only by changing the stress from the back and not the front! I tuned a lot for stickbows before I got this compound so that helps, you really see what's off and what's a laser after doing trad bows. It's interesting that as I build back up a crank at a time certain arrows snap back into the window you're talking about while others are going to need to be at full strength because they're less tuned/square/straight. Really didn't expect that. Others never stopped being on because they were so dead on that the window was enormous. Even at basement distance with fletches on you can tell the ones that look like they're on a wire. You know what I'm saying. The bow is famously forgiving, a mthews no cam, but it's just a half-assed basement tune. WHen it's at full power my best hunting shafts will group huge fixed broadheads and field points interchangeably at 60, so I'm a believer in shaft tuning forever now. I've been called a liar but why care? If you ever decide to get a compound I highly recommend the no-cam. It feels so much better than anything else I tried. Really nice entry point for a trad shooter. No front hump, no jerking, just raise and draw to anchor in one motion like a recurve. My buddy hates it but I hate his PSE, ha.

@@jcarry5214 I do know what you're saying lol. Learning trad I was going through different shot cycles and consequentlyndraw lengths which inevitably changed the poundage and it would just murder me on a group of arrows that I had tuned for "last weeks" draw at a different length and poundage. Now I've settled into something I like luckily but man trying to throw more or less weight on an already cut and tuned arrow just never worked it was wild how much cutting the shaft for the correct poundage was the only solution. Then I could change point weight by like 50/100 grains and it would onlynaffevt it a bit. Wild. I do have an old pse stinger x I've been bowfishing with and hunting with for years and it's got arrows tuned for it as well, I only recently got into trad but I haven't reached for the compound much since, just every month or so I bring it out to stay proficient incase I need to bring it out late season to secure a kill. I'm not a purist that bow has fed me for years and I intend to take some more with it before its retired. Then I will upgrade to the new hot gear lol.

@@jcarry5214 it's a beautiful thing to shoot from a few yards or several yards with no fletching and start consistently seeing nothing but a nock staring back at you from the target. Not just visual feedback the harmonics of sound and feel from the bow just feel right and the arrow just beautiful punches where it needs to with no wobble or wasted energy

the purpose of bareshaft tuning is you do not want lift. You are trying to get perfect flight with zero help of vanes. purpose is so when done and you add vanes the vanes do very little work for corrections in flight.

This is the difference in foc in my arrow setup with and without vanes btw

Post this "the aerodynamic principle of vanes, while the arrow is flying, has no correlation to the "mass added with tape". Additionally, the RF would like to clarify. "The purpose of a bare shaft is to find the best launch condition. THEN the fletch can correct any mistakes you might make i.e. grip, torque, weird shooting angles hunting, etc." Additionally...."broadheads have lift that must be offset by the vanes in a completely different manner aerodynamically". That will give AT plenty to debate. But I promise ya, no one is testing a damn thing.

will do...@@RanchFairy