Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Articles
Latest reviews
Author list
Classifieds
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Hunting
Crossbow Hunting
TAC 15/15i Basic Unpublished Information
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Super 91" data-source="post: 487828" data-attributes="member: 31217"><p>Konrad, this is the issue we are in the midst of uncovering. Does the TAC-15 shaft have a definitive spine? I certainly think so. I think the biggest problem is does it only have one spine, or varying areas that make it more hard to predict the actual spine? </p><p></p><p>I happen to have a RAM QC Carbon Arrow tester. It shows that each shaft does indeed have a spine. There is no way to test to see if the spine is variable. But I will be testing and indexing several dozen shafts to get one dozen that shows the exact same spine deflection. Once I get the dozen, I will have indexed them and will fletch them so that the hump is up on each shaft in relation to the fletching and way the nock attaches to the string. I will then be shooting groups and will see what kind of groups compared to unsorted shafts I get.</p><p></p><p>I will also be testing a variety of fletching configs as well. I have tried Blazers and found that the high profile was not as optimal as the lower profile vanes. I do have a number of vanes similar to the Duravane 3-D like what comes on the TAC shaft from the factory.</p><p></p><p>Just so you will know, Firenock makes a nock for the TAC shaft as well. It is the "D" nock and works VERY well. I have since tossed all my TAC nocks and replaced them with Firenock "D" nocks. They are so much better it is not even funny. You do not have to use the lighted circuit with the nock if you don't want to. But it makes shooting them fun to see the arrow going down range. These arrows are traveling so fast it is nearly impossible to track them down with the naked eye without some sort of aid. As to the dry fire, the nock plays a part but the length of the "D" loop is the real key here. Too long and the anti-dry fire mechanism will pop up before the "D" loop passes by. </p><p></p><p>I use 60 x 120 spacing on my TAC fletchings. The picatinney rail that goes over the shaft is the main reason the fletchings are spaced that way. I talked with one guy and he was saying that he wanted to cut that part of the rail away and use a standard 3 fletch config which in my opinion will work just fine. We may do this as well just to test our theory. Let me show you a pic for clarification.</p><p></p><p><img src="http://gallery.me.com/superfusion/100075/IMGP2406/web.jpg?ver=12848509430001" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p><p></p><p>And here are a few pics of some fletchings and their spacings I was trying last year. </p><p></p><p><img src="http://gallery.me.com/superfusion/100027/IMGP2379/web.jpg?ver=12846786840001" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Super 91, post: 487828, member: 31217"] Konrad, this is the issue we are in the midst of uncovering. Does the TAC-15 shaft have a definitive spine? I certainly think so. I think the biggest problem is does it only have one spine, or varying areas that make it more hard to predict the actual spine? I happen to have a RAM QC Carbon Arrow tester. It shows that each shaft does indeed have a spine. There is no way to test to see if the spine is variable. But I will be testing and indexing several dozen shafts to get one dozen that shows the exact same spine deflection. Once I get the dozen, I will have indexed them and will fletch them so that the hump is up on each shaft in relation to the fletching and way the nock attaches to the string. I will then be shooting groups and will see what kind of groups compared to unsorted shafts I get. I will also be testing a variety of fletching configs as well. I have tried Blazers and found that the high profile was not as optimal as the lower profile vanes. I do have a number of vanes similar to the Duravane 3-D like what comes on the TAC shaft from the factory. Just so you will know, Firenock makes a nock for the TAC shaft as well. It is the "D" nock and works VERY well. I have since tossed all my TAC nocks and replaced them with Firenock "D" nocks. They are so much better it is not even funny. You do not have to use the lighted circuit with the nock if you don't want to. But it makes shooting them fun to see the arrow going down range. These arrows are traveling so fast it is nearly impossible to track them down with the naked eye without some sort of aid. As to the dry fire, the nock plays a part but the length of the "D" loop is the real key here. Too long and the anti-dry fire mechanism will pop up before the "D" loop passes by. I use 60 x 120 spacing on my TAC fletchings. The picatinney rail that goes over the shaft is the main reason the fletchings are spaced that way. I talked with one guy and he was saying that he wanted to cut that part of the rail away and use a standard 3 fletch config which in my opinion will work just fine. We may do this as well just to test our theory. Let me show you a pic for clarification. [IMG]http://gallery.me.com/superfusion/100075/IMGP2406/web.jpg?ver=12848509430001[/IMG] And here are a few pics of some fletchings and their spacings I was trying last year. [IMG]http://gallery.me.com/superfusion/100027/IMGP2379/web.jpg?ver=12846786840001[/IMG] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Hunting
Crossbow Hunting
TAC 15/15i Basic Unpublished Information
Top