Arrow spine using thumb release

Benjamin · Post by **Benjamin** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 10:04 am

Hi all,
I apologise if this topic has been discussed already, but I couldn't find it in the search.
I am wondering if you need to tune your arrows differently when using thumb release than when you are using three finger. Do the arrows need to be spined differently? What is the general rule?
Thank you,

Ben

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Wed Oct 24, 2012 11:10 am

Ben,
There is no hard and fast rule. The arrows still flex, but depending on the effectiveness of your release you can use a greater range of spine than would work with a typical three finger release. As you probably know, even with three fingers, the effectiveness of your release can affect the spine that is necessary for your bow and arrow combination.
Generally speaking a stiffly spined arrow will go to the right and can be sighted along the shaft quite effectively. A softer spined arrow will go further to the left and that can be compensated for.

With a really good release the difference will be less and you can actually choose an arrow spine to match what part of the arrow or bow you want to aim with. Then you should stick to the spine that produces the results you wish. However, if necessary you can shoot a different spined arrow without too much trouble.

Most surviving thumb draw traditions do not put as much emphasis on spine as modern Western archery. They tend to concentrate on getting the weight of the arrow to match the draw weight of the bow. All things being equal, this would mean the heavier arrows would be stiffer as well.

Incidentally, the concentration on spine in Western archery is relatively recent, dating back to the 19th century, I think. I don't think Ascham mentioned it explicitly in Tudor times. I believe the idea was to get an arrow stiff enough not to deflect too much.

Benjamin · Post by **Benjamin** » Sat Oct 27, 2012 12:23 am

Alright, thanks for the help, Bede. That's really interesting..

Ben

jkekoni · Post by **jkekoni** » Mon Nov 12, 2012 12:53 pm

They tend to concentrate on getting the weight of the arrow to match the draw weight of the bow.

I am thinking that the weight of the arrow would generally match the spine quite closely, providing the arrows are similar otherwise. Heavier wood -> stiffer spine and thus the arrow is fit for a heavier bow.

Benjamin · Post by **Benjamin** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:18 am

Makes sense.. Thanks Jkekoni.

Ben

Pat Menzies · Post by **Pat Menzies** » Tue Nov 13, 2012 5:14 pm

The trouble with that theory is that it's not really true. Some woods have very high stiffness per mass and not surprisingly most of the sought after arrow woods fall in that class.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Thu Nov 15, 2012 7:30 am

Pat,
I wouldn't want to stretch this theory too far, but, in an area where a particular wood or bamboo is used for arrows, a heavier shaft of that wood is usually stiffer if all other things are equal (length diameter etc). It is not a rule, but a rule of thumb approximation. If you look at Arab Archery for instance, bows of a given draw weight are matched to arrows of a given mass.

I don't think anyone discussing this was implying that a more massive class of wood would necessarily be stiffer or a better arrow. To look at it from another angle: If you have two shafts of the same wood and the same length, the one with the greatest diameter will both be stiffer and heavier. There are occasions when this is not true, but mostly it is.

A massive wood like ebony or teak is not proportionately stiffer than pine or spruce because the different woods have more properties that affect their stiffness. The brittleness of ebony for instance would rule out making arrows out of it since its weight would require a very small diameter to match the weight of an ordinary arrow. That diameter would increase the chance of a flaw crossing the axis and it would probably break.

Daniel · Post by **Daniel** » Tue Dec 11, 2012 2:46 pm

Don't worry about that to much. With a thumb ring release you can use wide range of spine. I'm shooting two bows, #45 and #70 with the one set of well matched arrows. Just don't forget to grip the bow slightly from the side and hold it tight with your little, ring and middle fingers having rest of the fingers fairly loose (I keep my index finger and the thumb open). When you pulling the string back, you inducting slight twist to the bow arm's wrist (towards the bow) resulting bow rotation upon release. This rotation allows the arrow to clear the riser without touching it.
Arrows are very important. Get them matched as best as you can one to another (wooden and bamboo ones) or buy carbon or aluminium ones.

Benjamin · Post by **Benjamin** » Thu Dec 13, 2012 12:08 pm

Thanks for the reply, Daniel. Thats really cool. I am reading a book right now and I've just read in it that the author once used arrows with a spine of just 30lbs from his 60lbs bow and still had good arrow flight.

I guess its just really surprising coming from shooting three fingers my whole life and making my own arrows and putting such a big importance on spine. Thanks for the help

Daniel · Post by **Daniel** » Thu Dec 13, 2012 4:45 pm

You mean Adam Swoboda's book right? Well, he also said, though it is not in his book, that that set up proved to be very unforgiving. Later he made stiffer arrows and that worked better.

Arry · Post by **Arry** » Thu Dec 13, 2012 5:15 pm

Hehe, I also had to think of Adam Swoboda's book. Great that it has made it to Australia!

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Thu Dec 13, 2012 11:24 pm

I think it is important separate what you can do from what is most effective to do. This is clear in Adam's book too.

I have Turkish flight arrows that would hardly register on a stiffness tester and I have made similar arrows and shot them. The requirement for the shooter with light more flexible arrows is to have an almost perfect release. This is acceptable in flight shooting where you only think of angle, draw length and release, but in target archery or hunting you want some more forgiveness from your equipment. You also need consistency.

Having shot flight with three fingers for the first time this year, I can confirm that, even with that kind of draw, the variation in spine you can accommodate is quite large. However, to hit a target you need consistency in the behaviour of your arrows. Even with the thumb ring, it is worthwhile testing differently spined arrows to pick the ones that give your the best performance. And always make sure all arrows are the same.

Benjamin · Post by **Benjamin** » Fri Dec 14, 2012 1:07 am

Yes, it is Adam Swoboda's book! Its an awesome book! And yes, you're right. He did also add that if he didn't grip the handle of his bow correctly, then the flight was definitely affected.

Certainly, consistency is everything in target shooting. I am in the process of making up some differently spined arrows at the moment so I can have a play with different shafts, different fletching profiles, 3 and 4 fletches. It's a lot of fun!

My first thumb ring arrived in the mail recently so now Im really getting into the thumb release and Adam's book has been really great for information and help.

Bede · Post by **Bede** » Sun Dec 16, 2012 5:10 am

On old arrows in my collection, I have noticed that the broad heads often have four fletchings and so do some of the ultra-heavy amaji arrows. For sport horse archery and short distances four fletch can be useful in slowing down the arrows and causing them to straighten out more quickly though the same can be achieved with larger feathers in a three fletch configuration.

To clarify what kind of arrows I mean, they are reed arrows from India in the Mogul style. The fletching is rarely above 7 mm in height when it survives. When it doesn't it is still easy to count the number of feathers. I have never seen four fletchings on an original Turkish arrow, but they probably existed. However the survival rate suggests they were uncommon.

Considering the generally long and low fletching on this type of arrow, it might have been for aesthetic reasons that number of feathers was varied rather than the height. From a distance the three feather arrows and the four feather arrows would have looked the same in the quiver. Uniformity of fletching is normal in representations of archers from Iran and India.