Arrow Vane Study for Hunting (Bill from Iron Will)

[@DigtoDef]

Hey Bill and Garrett - Glad to see this podcast tonight. You guys did great explaining the science without going overboard. The more we can get the word out (and the more people getting the word out) on the science behind the bow and arrow the better. I liked the idea of emphasizing building in forgiveness: E.g., an arrow that's built for speed as the highest priority most likely doesn't have a lot of margin for error in shot execution or bow tune. I especially enjoyed the summary at the end regarding making good equipment choices for various bow types and game animals. Best regards!

[@DIYSportsman]

Thanks Darrel!

[@swd37sd]

One of the most difficult tests I tried to do in a controlled recording studio was a vane/noise test. It was inconclusive because we lacked the tools. This video discussion is phenomenal! My wife was not as excited to listen as me...but she had her kindle. Thanks for the information.

[@Kalishir]

I have nothing to comment, I just hope this interaction helps showing this to more people! Thank you for the content!

[@PoeOutdoors]

Great talk about many subjects and nicely put together, thank you both!

[@jimrice4699]

Thanks for this video. I really enjoy hearing Bill V's scientific perspective on all things archery and his no BS answers. Although Bill does wiggle a little in his seat when he is trying to avoid saying some things people may not want to hear. He always calls it like he sees it or maybe sometimes just bites his tongue but he won't mislead. At 48:00 re: matching vane direction to the bows natural spin imparted to the shaft. Garrett talks about his videos showing that in his testing with large BH matched to a smaller vane with only one degree of offset, the arrow took time to spin up and seemed to be understabilized but this characteristic was wholly or partly ? resolved by going to more helical on the vanes (2 degrees I think). Garrett seemed to be making the point that the issue with his arrow stability was that the right twist vanes were fighting the bows natural left spin, and therefore Garrett seemed to be suggesting that matching vane spin direction to the bows natural spin is important. With all due respect, the testing described did not provide any material support that theory. The example given proves nothing other than suggesting that particular arrow set up benefited from more vane spin. Unless Garrett has done other controls that is all we know. Nothing more, nothing less. Whether or not fighting the natural spin imparted by the bow had a measurable impact is wholly unknown. We already knew that a small vane with 1 degree offset will not optimally stabilize an arrow with a large BH. Before concluding that the issue was that the vanes were "fighting" the natural arrow spin, I suggest Garrett consider a few tests to rule in or rule out that theory (or don't waste your time and just listen to Bill V). Examples: 1) Repeat the "test" with the identical arrows fletched left 1 degree, left 2 degree, etc. and another batch right 1 degree, right 2 degree etc. See if there is any material difference in a) spin-up and/or b) accuracy (we really only care about accuracy). 2) After that initial test, you could continue to adjust for other factors (Coriolis force? the Dark Force? 😂) by shooting the same arrow arrangement with two different bows that are as identical as possible with the exception that one has a natural spin left, the other a natural spin right.

[@DIYSportsman]

Hi Jim, thanks for watching! Bill definitely is a great guy to listen to and learn from. I think you may have misunderstood what I said in the episode, which is okay as I didn't give a ton of background. Bill had mentioned a little earlier that he'd seen videos of more exaggerated knuckle balling video that he didn't observe himself. So I merely added that I had seen this effect with a less stabilized setup (1deg right vs 1 deg left with the same low profile vane and large broadhead - the difference in spin up was very noticeable. I never commented on accuracy because I agree, you wouldn't have wanted to use either. But it could help explain some of the observations people see on the internet. For the second part, where I mentioned switching to a higher profile vane, this was 3deg right vs 3deg left. These both had more restoring torque and are more in line with Bill's recommended setup. In this case, the high speed camera showed a slight difference in spin up (much less noticeable than the other test), but it did not have a practically significant difference in group size for me, at least in calm conditions, which agreed with Bill's findings. I think overall we pretty much see eye to eye on the topic.

[@judefuselier]

Thanks for this informative discussion! I feel valuable in informing prospective customers. Thanks gents!

[@timbow50]

It’s good to have solid reliable information with quality equipment and people that know what they’re doing. There’s an old video by “1nestly” with some various vane settings etc showing slow motion in flight and POI results. Even has the number of rotations over given? distance.

[@DIYSportsman]

Yep I remember seeing those videos back in the day. Pretty cool. I finally invested in a high speed camera so I can start getting similar kind of visuals and data.

[@matthewholmes8638]

Firenock made Aerovane 2's years ago. They have a airfoil and create lift. It has different stiffness on the vane. They also studied the only silent flying birds to make the vanes quiet. They are the most stable quietest vanes youll ever get. Theyve been around 20 yrs or more.

[@jonamason1875]

Loved the conversation. Great talk!

[@judefuselier]

For the algorithm, catch y'all in the morning.

[@robgrubb420]

Love these videos they confirm so many of my theories. and make me think. thanks Garrett.

[@GJVAT]

Thanks for the video! I've been needing this information

[@chrisfavorin1107]

Although an increase of 3 dB represents a doubling of the sound pressure, an increase of about 10 dB is required before the sound subjectively appears to be twice as loud. The smallest change we can hear is about 3 dB. The subjective or perceived loudness of a sound is determined by several complex factors.

[@DIYSportsman]

Yes, the logarithmic scale definitely can throw people off. 3dB to double power and 6dB to double wave pressure, along with perception of those levels and practical change. I've also seen the 10dB number fluctuate based on the source, since the data might change based on the test (lab with headphones and synthetic tones, skilled ears like a musician or an average joe, sound frequency, etc). I've seen some articles mentioning a skilled ear can detect a 1-2dB change, but most people need 2-3dB, which again is likely a lab test and in the real world would probably show no practical difference. Like you mentioned, there's more complexities involved translating to the real world.

[@garlandmcnew4282]

Bill touched on the visual component vs sound queues of whitetail around 1:14:00… the one doe that didn’t didn’t duck the arrow that had her head behind a tree. Dr Karl Miller’s research on whitetail having a much higher flicker fusion rate than humans (4x that of a human) and how that allows whitetail to essentially see the world around them in slow motion leads me to believe there’s something to them actually perceiving the arrow in flight more so than the sound of the arrow or even possibly the bow noise. Sound travels slower than light (obviously), and with a whitetails insane acuity with sensing motion and experiencing movement of objects differently, we might be (as Bill alludes to) going down the wrong rabbit hole with tiny differences in vane noise.

[@garlandmcnew4282]

If in fact deer are experiencing and processing movement at 4x “slower” speed than us humans (with uniform focus across their degree of vision), It sure makes sense they’d be able to see the incoming arrow, process the info and start moving before impact, even at short distances.

[@DIYSportsman]

It's an interesting concept for sure that requires more testing. My main hesitation is that if you've even watched video of an arrow being shot at a camera, even in slow motion there's not much movement to observe. It's like a point that gradually gets larger as it gets closer. I shot at a doe with a recurve a couple seasons ago that had her head buried in weeds feeding and she about hit the ground by the time the arrow got there, making me think that at least in that instance, it may have been more sound than sight. But as mentioned more testing to be done.

[@it_is_what_it_is_brotha]

Great conversation and love that scienece and being done on this topic....I watched every min and was hoping it'd end with what vane is Will shooting after all this but we will have to wait for that ha

[@DIYSportsman]

He has his own vane through Iron Will Outfitters. It's the Max Hunter profile but in a different material. If you go to his website they're available for sale.

[@aaronhall765]

Thanks for the video. So the old 3 fletch Blazers are still money? Did I understand that right?😊

[@DIYSportsman]

They are still a good choice. There are some options which have similar stability and are a bit quieter. But those tall blazers have always done well accuracy wise with broadheads at whitetail ranges.

[@alfonso9847]

so whats the best configuration for a fixed blade?

[@jasonnull2248]

Suprised that no one has mentioned it yet, the aero vane from firenock. Great video, I enjoyed every minute.

[@DIYSportsman]

Have you tried them before? I bought a pack of the aerovane ii a couple years ago. Initially flight and drag at 40 was no better than a blazer. But then I realized and confirmed that I was getting a strong knuckle ball. The shaft wasn't really spinning. After listening to dorge on some podcasts, I figured it was likely because I used a standard fletching jig to get thr zero offset, and my fletching was probably not 100% perfect, allowing the vanes to fight one another. Other recommendations like minimum speed limits for performance and use of very compact/aerodynamic broadheads only made me a little hesitant to keep pursuing testing. But at some point I'd like to test them again if they were professionally fletched.

[@jasonnull2248]

@@DIYSportsman I have some but haven’t put them on to test. I was just curious how (if tested) they would do in a drag model and flight testing. I also wanted to see if there has been any slow mo video of them in flight, I haven’t found any. According to Dorge it would compliment the drag. I mean it’s still going to have some drag but the lift would be something worth testing. Thanks for the reply.

[@floydgriffiths9148]

I’m not sure whether you addressed it directly. Does helical have any advantage stabilizing a broadhead vs. 2 or 3 degree straight offset, (all else being equal)?

[@DIYSportsman]

Technically a 2-3 degree straight offset is already helical once applied because the vane needs to wrap around the shaft a little in order to fully stick along the entire length of the vane. Helical clamps help accentuate that "wrapping" and make it easier to adhere with high offsets.

[@sarcazmo]

What is the difference between offset and helical? I use a vane master pro that allows offset… are they the same?

[@DIYSportsman]

It's easy enough to think of them as the same for these purposes. Technically, offset it just the angle relative to the shaft, whereas helical is describing the wrapping of the vane around the shaft. If you use a decent offset, you'll automatically be applying some helical for the entire base of the vane to be able to stick. Some jigs have separate straight and helical clamps. The helical clamp helps give the base of the vane some twist to be able to stick better at higher offset. The vane master pro handles offset with the pin setting, and you can adjust your twist with the two bars holding the vanes to allow it to fit tightly to the shaft.

[@cjr4497]

Did they try different shaft diameters? It matters for clearance. I still shoot .246 arrows. Seems like .166 and .204 shafts get all the attention.

[@DIYSportsman]

I don't know for certain though I'd strongly assume they used the .204 for everything since the Axis shaft is what the full iron will arrow system uses.

[@HawkeyeIK802]

May be better to focus in the CFD and use difference in pressure divided by baseline pressure to determine noise. It is less impacted by distance from instrument to arrow and will be seen in a scale other then dBa or deci Beles in the a scale. Deer are probably more sensitive to other scales at higher frequencies so this may give a more accurate reflection of the noise they hear instead of the noise we hear.

[@DIYSportsman]

Yes that's an interesting thought. Makes me wish I had a CFD license to play around with it. From what I remember reading from other university study research, deer are more sensitive to frequencies around 4-8kHz, whereas ours is most sensitive around 2-5kHz, and their upper limit goes higher than ours. Obviously there's some overlap there but it makes sense to bias toward a slightly higher range. When I'd done my historical sound testing I'd pick one of the louder frames before the arrow passed over the mic, and I'd look at a dB vs frequency plot focusing on the area under the curve in the ~4-8kHz range to compare one vane vs another.

[@johnarcher9480]

Would love to see some tests on Spin Wing style vanes. Super thin, and the curved shape can (theoretically) keep as much air spilling over the upper edge of the vane, add that together with insanely light weight, and you might be able to get a low profile vane that works similar to taller vanes. The Mylar can actually be quite still, or flexible. And at the shot, the should open up slightly (becoming a taller vane) then one up to speed, it would fold back to do the static shape for less drag…

[@DIYSportsman]

I can do that. I have mylar XS wings in 60mm high and 100mm that I got for traditional. They're light but not very durable with contact. They're widely used in barebow and olympic shooting with small diameter arrows and target points. Even the 60mm high are only like 0.5" tall if I really flatten them out, and they're shorter curled and taped on, so my speculation is they wouldn't have the same level of forgiveness with broadheads but need to try.

[@johnarcher9480]

@@DIYSportsman I have used slightly larger vanes with broadheads, and got surprisingly good results. They were Slick Trick magnums… known to fly well, but they are still 4 blade fixed heads. Being very light, it helps slightly with FOC, giving the vanes a little extra “leverage”. You are right, they don’t like contact, but I think there might be something there. Hopefully, the slow motion is good enough to see if the vanes do open up. Subscribed 😉

[@african7498]

The sailing fraternity have understood this for long. A taller mast creates more lift than a shorter wider sail. A taller shorter fletch should create more lift (steering or drag if you will) than a shorter longer vane. Physics. When it comes to sound, is there a real difference - if the deer can hear 20db real good then 25 or 30 db is not really more audible - it can hear and duck both. That's the danger of using %. Great content. Thanks.

[@DIYSportsman]

Yes great points. I also think about examples like windmills and boat props where diameter is a key variable. I think bowhunters have been so enamored with reducing sound that it has at some times come at the cost of forgiveness.

[@chapter4travels]

It seems if you move the vanes as far backward as possible, you increase the leverage they have on the arrow effectively increasing FOC without adding weight to the broadhead. Does this make any sense?

[@2cthetruth]

No, but thanks for your input 🙂

[@chapter4travels]

@@2cthetruth Ok, so putting the vanes 6" from the back won't make any difference either? Why not the middle of the arrow?

[@DIYSportsman]

On paper, you do increase the lever arm. So the general rule of thumb is to have the vanes as close to the nock as you can without getting some type of facial contact. But in practice, if they're, say, 1" vs 1.25", I don't know that the difference would be enough to be practically significant.

[@chapter4travels]

@@DIYSportsman I see a lot of guys with fletching a good 1.5" back from the nock, especially when using wraps. They could easily move those fletching an inch or more. I would think that would make a difference and it certainly couldn't hurt.

[@gavincarmody3302]

28” shaft, move the fletch 1” from the very end of the shaft, would shorten the lever arm 7% from the centre of the arrow. Every 1/4” would equal approximately 1.8% change in leverage similar to raising FOC%, weight excluded. Someone correct me if wrong

[@Going4BrokeOutdoors]

Great info guys, thanks for sharing.

[@eddieolachia5305]

What is the helicle offset on the IW vanes they sale ?

[@DIYSportsman]

I believe they fletch their arrows at a 3deg RH with those hybrid hunter vanes.

[@stephenballard3759]

Okay.I have a question if you're still answering questions. Not much of this applies to me but I do find every aspect of archery interesting.. I've heard several different channels talk about that phenomenon of arrows coming off of a string already spinning in one direction or another, before the veins even have a chance. I'll bet you guys hate the thought, but what happens when an arrow with slightly longer?helical vanes goes through something like a Whisker Biscuit rest? I know the whole concept probably annoys a lot of real pros, but wouldn't that force the arrow into rotating before it even left the bow? Rather than 15 feet in front?

[@DIYSportsman]

It's been a while since I've used a whisker biscuit. But what I've seen is that often if someone asks about them and a strong helical, people will mention the vanes getting wavy or showing signs of use (depending on the vane) from the extra contact and drag going through the bristles. With even a 2.5deg offset tall vane and a drop away, they'll get spinning very fast off of the bow. Moreso when matching spin direction of course, but not to the point where I feel like you'd need to force it at the cost of extra drag, contact, or premature vane wear.

[@willc3384]

In vanes vs. string induced spin...Vanes win every time. Is there a mili-second of instability when it stops and changes direction....negligible.

[@davidmcguinness9187]

Thanks for the video

[@willc3384]

On spin drift. If it happens with a baseball, can't it happen with an arrow?

[@DIYSportsman]

I dont claim to be an expert, but I think baseballs, golf balls, etc are moving from the magnus force. Per "Modern Exterior Ballistics" by McCoy, "Magnus forces acting on spinning projectiles are much smaller than those observed for low-velocity spinning spheres." Spin drift has more to do with the gyroscopic forces causing a bullet at very high rpm to tip toward the direction of twist. And even then, as far as I understand, it's a very, very minor factor in all but really long range rifle shooting. Bullets are heavier in the back than the front, so they need to spin fast enough to prevent from tumbling. Arrows are already stable being heavier in the front. They don't need high rpm gyroscopic stability. Therefore we say spin drift isn't really applicable with arrows.

[@YoureSoVane]

Yes it can. However the fletching largely prevents this. Spin drift happens for several reasons. The Magnus effect can move an arrow but not much, as the arrow doesn't spin as fast as a bullet. Maybe over 100 yards you can get a few millimeters of drift. Maybe. It's really minor at these speeds.

[@willc3384]

@@DIYSportsman Thank you! That was very thorough.

[@willc3384]

@@YoureSoVane Thank you for clearing that up for me.

[@bbmas1930]

If you could guarantee a pass through, you'd just make the fletchings out of a wafer thin spring steel. Sort of like those swords that are like foils. At some point 3D printed titanium would be possible surely. Like Easy vanes printed out of something that cuts. A chisel tip field point in case of bone contact up front and effectively a helical 4 blade on the back. Your vanes are your blades. Would fly like a field point!

[@DIYSportsman]

That's a cool concept!

[@willc3384]

That sounds pretty cool.

[@timbow50]

It’s been my experience that to like 40 yards the straight 1 1/2 to 2 degree straight offset seems to be optimum for me. Since sound speed is unbeatable in archery precision arrow flight is more relevant. POI is out of the shooters control on live animals but point of aim is the shooter responsibility. That’s where the best arrow flight one can get out of his equipment is mandatory. As far as long range shots as at these newer TAC events I also have to believe the slight 1 1/2 to 2 degree straight offset has minimum flight reducing effects compared to the helical vane mount. Bow sight scale settings I’ve done too 100 yards shows the helical drops approximately 4 yards on the sight scale. Non- scientific hand held shooting results. Just saying my experience.

[@2cthetruth]

I didn’t watch, and won’t, but can you do an in depth analysis of the effects of your typical deer tic annd its effect on arrow penetration? Deflection? Thanks!

[@DIYSportsman]

I plan on doing more test results and set up videos this summer. I'm not sure I understood the question entirely. Did you mean to type "taw" or something other than tic?

[@josephr1198]

Always great to hear what Bill has to say. Really wish he'd design and put out a mechanical broadhead.

[@royleerobinson5]

Sooo a blazer on a offset is the deal

[@T-Mak-s7x]

Only way I could get my big broadheads to fly perfectly was to put on 4 fletch Shield cut 5” feathers. I took scissors cut to 4”inch but man those feathers will fly anything. Even Turkey head Chopper Off’rs.

[@DIYSportsman]

If it works, it works so I won't knock it. That said, I would be suspicious if there's some sort of contact or tune issue if that much feather was required.

[@T-Mak-s7x]

@@DIYSportsmanI shoot plastic vanes for my expandable’s like G5 Deadmeat, but those big old 3 blade Rothaar 200 grain Snuffers it took 300 or 260 spine Axis and 4 big feathers to make it fly perfectly. I only shoot 20 yards 25 max and my Snuffer set up would be useless for the Elk guys out west at their ranges. I just understand I have to get 20 yards or less. Preferably less.

[@andrewfernandez8330]

DCA Super Sabers

[@turtleman5111]

Again, by the time that I heard an arrow whizzing toward me at 230 MPH(340FPS Xbow), I would then see the arrow buried behind me, after it went thru my chest cavity. The sound of the shot itself? How far away am I? Ahh, it doesn't matter. I don't forsee getting shot by a bow, at least for awhile!

[@ronaldirvineII]

Are you guys secretly brothers? lol. Idk why, but I'm like listening, and all of a sudden, im like, dang, are these guys' brothers, or am I losing my mind

[@guysavelli156]

You guys look related. Any blood?

[@stevie9361]

I'm an engineer. I graduated from lsu in 2007, and in all those years I've told less people "I'm an engineer" then you've done in this video. Come on now man

[@oris316]

Yet you said it twice in less than 50 words…😂 Now we all know you’re an engineer good job

[@goldtip34]

Good information, thanks