Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Helical....thin large diameter vs small diameter arrows

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Helical....thin large diameter vs small diameter arrows

    I just put some vanes on an old shaft to test out some new glue I bought and noticed I was able to get much more helical on the old shaft than I get on my new ones. The only difference I can see is the diameter of the arrows. The old ones were standard diameter, the new are easton axis. Is it common for larger diameter to allow more helical?

    Sent from my Samsung Captivate using Tapatalk.

    #2
    38 views and nobody has an answer for me? Dang I guess nobody has ever paid any attention.

    Sent from my Samsung Captivate using Tapatalk.

    Comment


      #3
      I have a theory but it might not make sense until I check it out. The helical is set in the vanes by the clamp. That does not change. The location of the vane from front to back is also set by the clamp, but is adjustable. So if you had to adjust the front to back angle that the vane sits on the shaft it could make it look like there is more helical on different arrows. That is provided you are using the same length vanes on both arrows. Like I said it is a theory and I have yet to go tithe garage and check it out on some old junk arrows.

      What are you calling "standard diameter" on your old arrows? And how much larger are they than the new ones?

      Comment


        #4
        I went from "regular sized" shafts like Gold Tip or Carbon Express bought at Academy most likely to Easton Axis nFused which are micro diameter shafts. I agree that the helical is set by the clamp to a point, but I've read about people putting various degrees of helical, like 4* 6* 11* etc. It seems to me that a smaller diameter shaft should make the vanes wrap around "tighter" or "faster" which would look like more helical, but in reality, I can get more angle on the larger shaft while still mantaining good vane base contact so even though the "wrap around" effect is not as tight, there's more angle, therefore created more helical. I like fixed blade broadheads, so I like a lot of spin for stabilization. I went with the Eastons because I've read, and believe, that a thinner shaft will creat less friction when passing through an animal, thereby allowing more penetration. It just makes sense, when the diameter of the broadhead ferule is larger than the diameter of the arrow shaft, the shaft is almost passing through and open hole, plus with less surface area to create drag, it's going to create less friction. As an added benefit, smaller diameter arrows exhibit less wind drift and I like that since I frequently hunt "cross wind". With all that said, I'm thinking more helical might make my shooting more consistent, and I beleive that consistency is more important that the benefits of a thinner diameter shaft, so I'm considering changing back to standard diameter shafts when I lose or break my remaining Axis arrows.

        Comment


          #5
          Given the Fletching is a "set" or "fixed" length, the degree set can appear to be greater on large shafts because there is more "surface circumference" than small diameter shafts. How ever, the small shafts would produce the optical illusion that there is more because they "wrap" the shaft with a smaller Surface/circumference with the same length fletch that is on the larger shafts. "Wrapping" would not be a problem if you have plenty of fletch clearance. If you were to "down scale" the length of the fletching on the small shafts "to the same scale" as the larger shafts, then it would appear the same/be the same. Hope this helps.

          Being a metal fabricator, I have to deal with degrees, locations, and circumferences on projects all the time.
          Last edited by Texas Grown; 01-21-2012, 11:28 AM.

          Comment


            #6
            I agree TG, but I think the issue is that you have to get good contact between the vane base and the arrow shaft. I suppose with the right clamp, you could wrap it around there pretty good on small diameter shafts, but with a set amount of twist in the clamp, you can only wrap around so far and still have good contact. This is why I was able to get more angle with the larger shaft.

            Comment


              #7
              I agree 100% . The clamp is the culprit! .

              Comment


                #8
                The 4 6 and 11 are degrees of offset. Not helical. Meaning the rear is 4 degrees offset to the front, instead of in a straight line. That is what makes the helical(which is fixed) appear to be more.


                The offset is what I was trying to explain earlier. You may have to put more offset into the jig to get a good seat on a different sized shaft.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I think tg nailed it. when I think about my ez Fletch, if I clamped on a perfectly flat surface, the vane would sit 4 degrees angled and have no curl. then if I put it on an axis shaft, it would still only be at a 4 degree angle to the shaft, but the wrap is going to cause the vane to curl. in my opinion, the curl will cause more spin.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X