Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'PSE TAC 15/15i Crossbow Hunting Forum' started by Len Backus, Nov 8, 2010.
TAC 15/15i Review
In one of your threads where you speak about a 1.8" grouping at 100 yards some of your readers were asking about chrono speeds and kinetic energy at the 100 yard distance.
Here are some pictures and the chrono evidence that will answer their questions. I suggest that you post this information in the thread so it leaves nobody wondering just how much speed and energy this crossbow is actually packing when it's being shot.
Once you do the work on these TAC's, they just plain shoot.
100 yards. Sorta windy. Can do better...
Resized to 59% (was 1024 x 768) - Click image to enlarge
Moved up to 90 yards......wind calmed down and gave a short window to shoot.
Resized to 59% (was 1024 x 768) - Click image to enlarge
Shot over the chrono at the bow. 433 grain arrow at 394 fps. I moved the chrono to 99 yards and shot over it there. Same arrow 333 fps. That is only a 61 fps loss over 98 yards. 106.7 foot pounds of energy at 100 yards. Impressive! 149 foot pounds at point blank range. Unreal.
These arrows have firenock lighted circuit packs and batteries in them, so they are fully loaded to achieve the 433 grain arrow weight.
Jon, thanks. Great groups!
Imagine even being able to shoot through a chronograph without wrecking it at that range. I was able to shoot through mine at that distance but for some reason could not get a reading so i'm glad to see your results number.
Believe it or not these are not the results of my shooting. My results very closely match these numbers in grouping performance by my velocity is just a tiny bit better because my arrows weigh slightly less without the circuit and battery packs in them.
This is the Chrono work and shooting that Super 91 had achieved with his TAC15i after completing the arrow sorting and tuning work this past fall. It had been posted in a thread on Xbow Nation and I wanted to get it on your website so our members could actually see what you were talking about and answer the questions about speed and performance at these distances.
It struck me that some of them are not TAC owners, so they may think we're lobbing arrows with little energy behind them at these distances. They don't understand that there is way more energy at 100 yards from these crossbows than they can ever develop with the fastest compound bows at point blank distances. !06.7 foot pounds of energy means a complete pass threw of just about anything on the North American continent.
Even the fastest compound bows can't deliver this type of energy because in order to achieve 333 fps they would have to be shooting IBO specs which means their arrows are much to light in weight to achieve the 106.7 foot pounds of energy!
I hope this helps our readers with some perspective on just how devastating these crossbows can be with the proper tuning and set up.
Reading this right? At 100 yards, they are still producing more CE than any other crossbow at point black range?
That is right. EDIT, thought you meant compound bow, missed that, sorry.
My comment, which is easily verifiable fact, was that these crossbows produce more KE (Kinetic Energy) at 100 yards than any Compound Bow shot at point blank range on the market.
This is very easy to calculate based on a compound bows "Power Stroke" vs. that of the TAC15 crossbows "Power Stroke".
When people see any given compound bows speed rating advertised they seem to forget that the rating is almost always given in IBO ratings. IBO is a rating system that is based upon 70 lbs of draw weight at 30" of draw length, using an arrow that is weighing between 5 and 6 grains per inch.
How many people do you know that are shooting anything even close to this?
Although the biggest selling bow size by far industry wide is the 29" at 70lbs., the fact is that few archers can actually draw this length correctly and maintain good archery form. A 29" draw statistically would be for a man of about 6 feet tall and over 185 pounds.
For every 1" below thirty inches of draw weight you would need to subtract 10 fps. of velocity. For every 5 pounds of bow weight below 70 lbs. you can subtract another 10 fps., so without me doing any additional subtractions for arrow weights above 5.5 grains per inch (which affect velocity), it becomes very easy to see why none of today's compound bows can get even close to these numbers.
Different shooters may have different configurations and different styles of shooting, but the laws of physics and mathematics are constant and never lie!
i still cant get those groups at 20 yard. bow should be back for the 4th time on monday. they shipped it before calling again.hope its right this time, going to florida and texas soon.
Just a quick question, I know you've answered it before, but I deal with hundreds of people writing about problems of different types, so it gets hard to keep track after a while. We're your arrows ever spine tested, marked and each one aligned to your arrow nocks exactly the same?
i bought 6 dozen arrows,to make sure i had enough good ones.but no i never
testest them yet because the engineers at pse have said being a rapped
arrow that was not a cridical test. i ve been shooting 40 year and a pretty good bow mechanic for 20. a 6 inch group at 20 yards tells me there are problems with the bow. still will try anything you think will heip.
I've lived through most, if not all of the problems you've described with your crossbow, on my TAC15i. In my case it was a slow progression of changes that finally got it to the point where it was shooting at six inch groups at 100 yards as consistently as the wind will permit. This is from a bench rested position.
I've proven to myself and other shooters, like Super 91, just how important the matched arrows are, so it's one important step to insuring much tighter groups.
The information u were given by This person from PSE is very wrong and both Super 91 and I have conclusively proven it with our own Carbon Pine Testers and Easton Electronic Gram Scales. The PSE TAC15 Arrows are not a good quality arrow. Their straightness factor is .003 as compared to the .001 of other producers. They have very inconsistent variations in the shaft walls is very inconsistent and worst of all, the shafts are so far out of being perfectly round that if you pull your nocks out, you can easily see how many of the nock shafts have been warped out of round to match the arrows lack of roundness. Last, the synthetic materials that PSE has always used on their nocks is to soft. This allows the nocks forks to spread as the arrows are shot numerous times. You end up with a nock that fits to loosely to your crossbows string.
This is why I recommended changing to the Firenock D nocks and using the Bulldog Collars. The collars maintain perfect roundness of the shaft and provide a great deal of strength to the back end. The Firenock D nocks are uniform and are made on a modern nock mold, of much better materials.
I'll supply more information later on what other changes should improve your groups.
Thanks for your help. i have switched to fire nocks and had 6 break on release.talking to the owner at the ata show he told me he some bad material on one run and that was the problem. he replaced them. he is very interesting to talk to. i also have his arrow jig. but his iphone app for a bow sight is the best. you are very correct that the tac15 arrows are not a very good arrow. is anyone shooting something different?
That was Dorge that you were speaking about and yes, he's a very interesting fellow. He also stands behind everything his company produces, so if there's ever a problem, he'll make it right.
I can't recommend another arrow to replace the PSE TAC15 Arrows at this point. My reasoning is as follows; Firenock produces a new carbon shafted arrow that's light years ahead of the PSE TAC15 arrows. They are supper Straight, perfectly uniform in shaft wall thickness and diameter. They are perfectly round end to end, so they are in every respect an ultra high quality arrow that is also multi-spined and built on a woven carbon multi-layer composition. All this is exactly what we've been waiting for. The only problem is that the PSE TAC15 Arrows are spined correctly for the poundage and torque of these crossbows, at .0150.
The Aerobolt II's that Dorge is having produced are spined at .0250, which make them a bit softer in spine than the PSE TAC15 Arrows. Basically this means that they will work well when equipt with an 85 grain field-point or broadhead, but as you add any weight to the front of the arrow it requires more spine stiffness to be able to handle more mass weight.
I can't tell you if these arrows can handle anything additional because I haven't tested his arrows out at long distances yet, nor have I tested them with 100 grain heads or greater. They are very expensive regardless how good the quality of the carbon is, so nobody I'm aware of has any good solid testing statistics to validate if his arrows will or won't support a range of different weight heads and still fly well.
Nobody else industry wide has come up with an arrow that is well suited to this crossbow, yet. Both myself and Super 91 have built sets of arrows using the PSE TAC15 Shafts that fly extremely well and are as durable as possible. Each arrow is precisely matched for both spine characteristics and balanced to within 3 100th's of a grain for weight consistency. This is how we've both managed to produce incredibly tight groups at up to 100 yards. It's the only way I know of that it's possible unless somebody is shooting the same arrow each time they take a shot.
I taught Super 91 the process of measuring spine, aligning nocks and then how to weight balance his arrows using an electronic grain scale and epoxy. He's a bright guy and learned well.
I also found that the Whisker Biscuit Arrow Rest causes a series of problems due to inconsistent friction it puts on the arrows each time they are fired. It is also responsible for constraining the natural oscillation of an arrow as it is fired. This effects consistency from shot to shot, so I changed to the QAD Style Rest to eliminate these restrictions.
I personally think it's best to make changes slowly and sequentially so that you can measure the gain or impact of each change until you achieve your desired accuracy level. There's obviously a big difference between a tack driver and an average rifle or crossbow. Each shooter needs to find at what level their weapon is performing to meet their individual needs.
Even with a Whisker Biscuit Style Arrow Rest, these crossbows should be able to produce a 3 inch group at 60 yards any day of the week as long as your arrows are correctly matched.
Also, take a very close look at your four vanes on each arrow when they are loaded on your crossbow, just prior to a shot. I found that many times, during a shot, one of my vanes would come in contact with the underside of my upper Weaver Rail. This would cause launch variations that again were undesirable for consistency, so I shortened my uper rail by 2.75" to eliminate this problem.
This modification also allowed me to shoot 3 vane configurations, if I wanted, but the main factor was it corrected a contact launch problem.
After all the changes and all the experience I've gained over time on these crossbows, I personally think that the TAC15 version has one or two benefits over the TAC15i version. They deal with the silencing capability of the unit and the fact there are so many different AR-15 lower units that one can chose from. Otherwise, both can be made to shoot extremely accurately with a little patience and work.
great stuff. a year and a half and 100's of hours later i would consider being patient, and im still not giving up, archerys in my blood. the whisker biscuit is marginal, although the biggest seller for years in my shop, i never considered shooting it on my compounds. would love to go to the QAD rest when mounting bracket is available.
i also shortened my rail to shoot 3 fletch,dont think 4 fletch will fly as well. all ive been able to do with arrows is match weights,not enough consistancy for much else. i will try spine test to see what i get.
thank you very much