Sitka Gear
LOW FOC ?
Equipment
Contributors to this thread:
Bou’bound 10-Nov-23
scentman 10-Nov-23
DanaC 10-Nov-23
fdp 10-Nov-23
rattling_junkie 10-Nov-23
MA-PAdeerslayer 10-Nov-23
smarba 10-Nov-23
Ambush 10-Nov-23
Ziek 10-Nov-23
Bentshaft 10-Nov-23
Corax_latrans 10-Nov-23
Matt 10-Nov-23
Murph 10-Nov-23
elkmtngear 10-Nov-23
Corax_latrans 10-Nov-23
Beendare 10-Nov-23
Corax_latrans 10-Nov-23
elkmtngear 11-Nov-23
carcus 11-Nov-23
Beendare 11-Nov-23
x-man 13-Nov-23
12yards 13-Nov-23
WhattheFOC 13-Nov-23
HDE 13-Nov-23
Beendare 13-Nov-23
x-man 13-Nov-23
JohnMC 13-Nov-23
12yards 13-Nov-23
HDE 13-Nov-23
x-man 13-Nov-23
HDE 13-Nov-23
Matt 13-Nov-23
Coondog 13-Nov-23
WV Mountaineer 14-Nov-23
x-man 14-Nov-23
bluedog 14-Nov-23
TGbow 14-Nov-23
Kurt 14-Nov-23
fdp 14-Nov-23
x-man 14-Nov-23
scentman 14-Nov-23
TGbow 14-Nov-23
Beendare 14-Nov-23
bluedog 14-Nov-23
Beendare 15-Nov-23
bluedog 15-Nov-23
x-man 15-Nov-23
Corax_latrans 15-Nov-23
x-man 16-Nov-23
Beendare 16-Nov-23
From: Bou’bound
10-Nov-23
Does anyone have any thoughts or experience, positive or negative, on shooting a lower FOC arrow. In the 10% area vs, the generally accepted 13-15%.

From: scentman
10-Nov-23
OK bou , I'll bite. What the FOC kind of question is that?

From: DanaC
10-Nov-23
7-10% was the old standard.

From: fdp
10-Nov-23
I made some wooden arrows that were neutral (balanced at the center point of the shaft) one time because I learned that many flight shooters prefer that profile. They shot just fine but I never shot any game animals with them.

10-Nov-23
Yes, majority of my animals were shot with 10%, and great performance

10-Nov-23
Sharp broadhead….tuned bow….dead animal…. People buy arrows off the shelf, glue in inserts that came with it, screw on a broadhead, and kill with them.

From: smarba
10-Nov-23
I would think there are other factors involved. Low FOC with tiny fletching vs. low FOC with larger/better steering fletching would likely fly differently. Poorly tuned bow with low FOC vs perfectly tuned bow with low FOC would likely fly differently.

Just have to shoot them in your setup and decide?

From: Ambush
10-Nov-23
I bet 80% of archers don’t know their arrow’s FOC. But then 90% of archers claim their arrows “fly like darts!”

Mine changes because I shoot 100 and 125 grain heads on the same arrows. And I don’t know or care what the FOC is.

From: Ziek
10-Nov-23
Typically, when this is discussed the only considerations are arrow flight and dynamic spine at launch. But there are two dynamic spines involved when shooting at animals; one at launch and one at impact. Increased FOC positively effects both.

From: Bentshaft
10-Nov-23
Mine are 14.6 % with 150 grain heads and 12.4 % with 125 heads. I like heavier heads. I do like my arrows with 150 grain broadheads. Awesome, forgiving flight

10-Nov-23
“People buy arrows off the shelf…”

Yes, but what KIND of arrows??

The bow I was shooting yesterday tunes for me with either a 340 carbon + 225 grain FP (about 9 GPP and 21% FOC, and I’m hunting with 235 gr BH) or a 2117 aluminum + 175 (8.9 GPP, 16.2% FOC, and BH for this arrow come in at 180-185). I could use a lighter point with a 2018 + 125 (8.3 GPP) but that’s still showing 12.6% FOC in the calculator… Or maybe a 2020 and 135 to get me back up to 9GPP and 12.4% FOC…

To get down to 10%, FOC ain’t easy. I would have to shoot a 1918 aluminum with an 80 grain point (at a rather stupid-light 7.4 GPP, 9.2% FOC) or I could go with a 2020 and 100 gr up front (adding 1.5” in total length) to come out at 8.7 GPP and 9.6% FOC.

But who does that??

Probably nobody, I’m guessing, because the only people who are going to shoot a high-GPI shaft are the guys who are looking for high total GPP.

So unless you are a wood-arrow fan, you would really have to go out of your way to get there. Once you get into more than 14 GPI shafts, you can start hitting 10% FOC pretty easily, like with a 28”, 14 GPI arrow and a 125 gr point (540 gr TAW), and I would bet that more than a few deer have been killed by a combo like that.

From: Matt
10-Nov-23
Back in the day people predominantly shot aluminum arrows and 100 gr. heads. I would be the average FOC was in the single digits. And they still worked just fine.

FOC is one of those things that I think people place WAY too much importance on.

From: Murph
10-Nov-23
Idk know that it matters a ton nor is their many good enough to tell, but IMO if you wanna shoot a heavier arrow why not put it in the front within reason of course or no spine chart in the world will forgive you but I shoot a pierce Gold tip 300 spine 175grs in the front with a total arrow weight of 458 it’s a hard hitting very forgiving arrow out to long distance and I wknt be changing anytime cuz it proved to be a killer this fall..

From: elkmtngear
10-Nov-23
"Back in the day people predominantly shot aluminum arrows and 100 gr. heads. I would be the average FOC was in the single digits. And they still worked just fine"

I still shoot Aluminum shafts, I come out at FOC around 4. They really do fly well !

10-Nov-23
“I still shoot Aluminum shafts, I come out at FOC around 4. ”

Just curious— what are your specs for shaft size/length and point weight??

“… there are two dynamic spines involved when shooting at animals; one at launch and one at impact. Increased FOC positively effects both.”

First - I’d definitely agree that dynamic spine upon impact is generally ignored (as in, I think a lot of people know that high FOC is Good, but probably don’t appreciate why) and actually pretty decisive, because a weak spine flexes on impact and once the center of mass of the arrow is no longer behind the point, Bad Things happen. Which is why guys shooting #35 longbows can get a clean pass-through on a deer while guys shooting #50+ compounds can fail to do so….

That said…. If you are properly tuned, isn’t FOC immaterial at launch?

If you don’t agree with that, please do explain…

But I did notice a curious thing when I got to toying with the spine calculator and plugging in higher values for wood shaft densities….

My intuitive sense was that a heavier arrow (GPI) would accelerate more slowly, therefore acting stiffer at a given static spine rating (as occurs when adding weight to the rear) because fewer Gs. But (Duh!) because mass is distributed fairly evenly along the length of the shaft (tapers excluded), adding mass apparently weakens the dynamic spine, whether it’s in the point or anywhere else in the front half…

Which means that the dynamic spine upon impact is weaker, which allows the increased mass of the shaft to wander farther off of the line of initial penetration when provoked, which is going to Do Bad Things. My first forays into bareshaft testing were pretty grim, with overspined arrows snapping right off after hitting a soft target at an unforgiving angle… Coulda saved myself a few bucks just by starting a few steps closer…

Anyway… Guys like elkmtngear are going to do a lot better with a Howard Hill type of broadhead with a mechanical advantage than with anything shorter, wider or otherwise higher-resistance WRT penetration…. Of course, it also helps a lot if you avoid strong bones. ;)

Flight shooters like neutral FOC because (as EMG said) they fly real well…. if they are tuned right… but more FOC is more forgiving, and a few of my Most Learned Mentors have noted that a high FOC arrow is practically half-fletched even as a bare shaft… Plus, Flight shooters don’t give a rip about penetration or probably even whether their arrows survive the one impact, just as long as it flies as far as possible and the judges can find where it landed…. Hunting site, so I’m assuming that most here want an arrow that doesn’t waste any momentum slapping the animal and causing it to run that much harder…

From: Beendare
10-Nov-23
Testing by the original rocket scientists back in 1940’s ( controlled scientific testing) shows 10-16% Center of mass to be most efficient.

Since then, all of the experts back those numbers

10-Nov-23
“Sure wish I had a dollar…”

No kidding! But those days are gone. Hardly anybody shoots enough poundage anymore to make that combination work without going to nearly full-length shafts… And even at 30”, that’s still 13% FOC. ;)

From: elkmtngear
11-Nov-23
"Sure wish I had a dollar for every whitetail killed with an Easton xx75. 2117 & 125 grain broadhead".

Those are my exact specs, with a 27.5 inch shaft, 4 fletch (I fletch my own arrows). I shoot an Elite Pure, 65 pound limbs. Being a finger shooter, I just could never seem to "tame" the carbon arrows, even if I used weight tubes.

From: carcus
11-Nov-23
Easton arrows with standard inserts for the most part, I use 50gr inserts in my axis 300 but just for spine. I've never cared about FOC

From: Beendare
11-Nov-23
Bou, one of the best lines I’ve heard regarding FOC is from Jay Barrs ( olympian and Bowhunter) he says it stands for Effing Over Complicated.

Most long time bowhunters cant tell you their FOC…and none of them I know set up their arrows with that in mind.

Considering the uber high FOC guy many listen to “proved” his theory with Rubber bands and soda straws….I think I will listen to the experts- grin

From: x-man
13-Nov-23
"Testing by the original rocket scientists back in 1940’s ( controlled scientific testing) shows 10-16% Center of mass to be most efficient. Since then, all of the experts back those numbers"

Until we have self-propelled arrows, this is useless data for flight stability. It does however show the uselessness of flex and dynamic spine at the launch.

From: 12yards
13-Nov-23
I killed a bunch of deer with 2315s, 100 grain head and 4" feathers. I think FOC would have been less than 10%. They flew fine and killed fine.

From: WhattheFOC
13-Nov-23
The FOC science makes sense to me, so I’ve added a bit of weight up front. I think they came in at 15% - not sure. My old aluminums worked fine, but I believe my current arrows are better in every way.

As with most things in life, the pursuit of UBER or EXTREME usually takes a good idea and ruins it.

From: HDE
13-Nov-23
"Until we have self-propelled arrows, this is useless data for flight stability."

Not really. It's the sudden acceleration and deceleration that is the variable of interest, not the stabilized trajectory, so it does matter.

From: Beendare
13-Nov-23
Xman, The tests I referred to were done with a bow, in a shooting machine to control for shooter error with a move-able weight to adjust the FOC, which they called center of mass at the time. Hickman controlled for all of the variables; shooting machine, exact same weight, same arrow even but with a weight inside that could be moved- pretty clever. Hickman determined 10%-16% was the sweet spot of the bell curve….but noted that very low or very high center of mass disrupted the arrows flight.

The guys doing these scientific controlled tests went on to be recognized Rocket scientists ( Legit) , they named the space center after Goddard. CN Hickman is in the archery hall of fame for his studies on the science behind archery.

The tests are compiled in a book, “Archery, The Technical side”.

From: x-man
13-Nov-23
Written in 1947. No doubt with modern centershot compound bows and carbon arrows...

Was that before or after vinyl records went from cylinder to flat disc?

From: JohnMC
13-Nov-23
How can someone with the handle WhattheFOC not know his FOC? :)

I don't know mine nor care

From: 12yards
13-Nov-23
Elite Synergy set at 56# - Victory VForce Elite 350 - TAW 442 gr. - 28" standard components with a 20 grain backweight and125 grain head - FOC = 14.1%.

Elite Synergy set at 52# - GT Hunter XT 340, 28" with standard components and 125 grain head - TAW 421 gr. - FOC = 11.1%.

Elite Enkore 52# - Easton Sonic 340, 28" with 3" feathers and standard components, 125 grain head - TAW 384 gr. - FOC = 15.3%.

From: HDE
13-Nov-23
"Written in 1947. No doubt with modern centershot compound bows and carbon arrows..."

You're not taking into account Young's Modulus for wood (arrows) against carbon from recurve to modern compound.

From: x-man
13-Nov-23
Sorry, just still trying to envision the 1947 shooting machine and a recurve. Did that arrow have any paradox? What affect did that sliding weight have on dynamic spine/paradox? HMMM, Perhaps we could also dig up the Wright Brothers notes and give them to the Air Force to help them understand flight better...

From: HDE
13-Nov-23
^^^ the Air Force understands flight because of the Wright brothers, not the other way around. LOL.

From: Matt
13-Nov-23
Were Ashby’s long bows center shot and did he use carbon arrows?

From: Coondog
13-Nov-23
I was shooting an Easton Axis 300 (.204) for the past three years. Total arrow weight was 521 grains and 160 grains up front. FOC was roughly 10.5%. The arrow blew through anything in its way and had pretty good down range accuracy at longer distances (80-130 yards). However, I wanted a better FOC percentage to see if it could help more with down range accuracy and wind drift. So, I switched to the Axis Long Range 250 (.166) this year. Total arrow weight is 536 grains and 210 grains up front. That makes my FOC 16.3%. I have noticed that there is far less wind drift (I’m sure shooting a .166 helps with this as well) and it is like the added point weight helps pull the arrow down range.

14-Nov-23
ttt

From: x-man
14-Nov-23
Here's your sign...

From: bluedog
14-Nov-23
" it is like the added point weight helps pull the arrow down range."

Think I'll tie some cement blocks to the front bumper of my old truck.... should help ?????? ;)

From: TGbow
14-Nov-23
Lot of animals have been taken with shafts like the 2916 for example..125 grain heads. Never heard much about heavy FOC in the 70s . Shot a lot of wood arrows also without a heavy FOC..shot deer with them and the 2916s..never had a problem

From: Kurt
14-Nov-23
Shot a lot of 22-16 XX-75 Aluminum arrows but never once heard of a 2916? Was it aluminum? If so it was a fat bugger!

From: fdp
14-Nov-23
" it is like the added point weight helps pull the arrow down range." Think I'll tie some cement blocks to the front bumper of my old truck.... should help ?????? ;)" That is entertaining.

From: x-man
14-Nov-23
2916, more commonly known as conduit. :)

If that was only typed once it could be a typo. Likely just confused with either the 2219 or 2419, which were both available in the XX75 Camo Hunter.

From: scentman
14-Nov-23
2219 was popular back then, Lincoln logs with fetching lol!

From: TGbow
14-Nov-23
" it is like the added point weight helps pull the arrow down range." Think I'll tie some cement blocks to the front bumper of my old truck.... should help ?????? ;)" That is entertaining.

I'm laughing so hard..I'm sorry that's just funny

From: Beendare
14-Nov-23
True, testing in the 1930's and 40's didn't use Compounds......so is it a coincidence The Easton engineers testing corroborates the test results from Goddard and Hickman?

Coincidence that every top pro in every archery discipline is within the Same range?

Maybe the testing in the early days was with different archery equipment, but the results have been verified over the decades.

FOC on the extreme ends of the spectrum doesn't improve anything, be it approaching Zero or 30%- in fact it's a negative. So whomever is telling you different is a quack.

From: bluedog
14-Nov-23
Some of you old guys know of Frank Pearson I'm sure... (Randy Ulmer would stop in often back then just to chat with Frank) . I was at his place in Vail one day and I asked him once what the FOC on his arrows was. He didn't know, said unless you were stabilizing broadheads he saw no importance in it. Just so they had good flight and were stiff enough. Out of curiosity we checked one of my 3d arrows and one of his arrows. (He'd just got back from South Africa where he won a 100 meter competition) Anyway ... my 3d arrows that summer came out at about 6.5%. Frank's arrow, which Easton sent him by the case as a sponsor, came out at not quite 2.5%. Really

He used these for everything. Frank and his wife Becky were both world champions back then.

Meaningless related to broadheads and hunting but maybe of interest

From: Beendare
15-Nov-23
Thats a good example Bluedog.

I Have heard some crazy stuff from the great target guys...though I don't think it equates to what's best for the rest of us.

I heard Terry Ragsdale talk of setups with very light nibs used back in the day. I've seen the Hoyt rep [a pro shooter back in the day] move his tuned bows rest 3/8" out and shoot multiple arrows in the same hole from 15y. Dwayne Martin told me the year he won Vegas and out shot the compound guys with his recurve with multiple 300 rounds in a row that his arrow wasn't the one with the best tune- best arrow flight. His slightly out of tune setup shot concisely 2 points higher...and thats what he won with.

If it works for you...then go for it.

From: bluedog
15-Nov-23
Terry Ragsdale could shoot. His wife Michelle could really shoot. PSE used to be handy stop for me on the way home after work to use their practice range. Even long after I'd switched to shooting Mathews they were still cool. Oftentimes Michelle and I were only ones using the range in the afternoon Tucson heat. Super nice person and a pretty Lady for certain.

I guess I tried to duplicate Frank Pearson's and her shooting form.... relaxed and easy. (Only starts arguments but no tension and no surprise shot.) Pearson said if you couldn't shoot as long as you felt like you were shooting too heavy a bow. I did go from 66# to 56# -58# after learning from him. Made a difference.

Pretty certain the Ragsdales were both 1 time mentored by Pearson. Pearson, long before I knew him, was with PSE . Him and Shepley had some kind of bad falling out.

From: x-man
15-Nov-23
Terry once told me..."I don't care if my target arrows cartwheel like a throwing knife on the way to the target...as long as each one is exactly the same, it'll hit where I aim it."

15-Nov-23
“ It does however show the uselessness of flex and dynamic spine at the launch.”

Flex at launch is neither useful or useless — it simply IS. And it’s (strictly speaking) inevitable, so best learn to live with it or make it work for you.

From: x-man
16-Nov-23
My arrows don't flex at launch. Perfect round holes in paper from one inch to 12 yards, which is the length of my indoor tuning range.

From: Beendare
16-Nov-23
Yeah, accuracy is a priority for sure.....

But my theory is Bad arrow flight has caused more wounding and penetration problems than Mech BH's or other arrow factors like FOC. I've seen it many times....and arrow wobbling on its way to an animal, then the hunter blames it on something else.

Nevermind the top target guys may shoot whatever arrow gains them a couple points.....they all definitively state that they wouldn't hunt with that setup, they use a BH tuned arrow to hunt with.

  • Sitka Gear