Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Winact VS. Winact Focus

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,921

    Winact VS. Winact Focus

    I saw on several different websites, that there are Win&Win limbs known as Winacts, and Winact Focus......Other than limb graphics, what is the difference, if any??......I have a set of Short Winact Focus limbs, and the only thing different about these limbs, VS. any other Wood/Carbon limb that I've owned or looked at closely, is that there is a very thin layer of black material (Carbon??) between the wood lamination's that starts just below the recurve, and terminates at the limb tips.....A stiffening wedge, of sorts?....I know that these limbs are pretty smooth at my draw, reasonably quiet, and fairly quick, compared to some ILF limbs that I've owned...Over-all, I'm very pleased with these limbs, I wish that they were a few pounds heavier, and wouldnt mind finding another set of these limbs, at least in the 40# weight range...Thanks in advance for any info............Take care...........Harperman

    Those who separate Politics, and Morality, will never understand either one....John Viscount Morley


  2. #2
    Focus limbs have been the first tentative of evolution in terms of torsional stability made by W&W around year 2002. Difference to Winact carbon was the addition of an extra carbon layer from the curve to tip area, with the purpose to make them less sensitive to torque at full draw. The result was ok, but his made the limbs very hard (not smooth) to draw, and much slower than the Winact carbon, so thy have been quite unsuccesfull in sales and have been discontinued after one year, only.
    ______________________________ _______________
    Do or don't do. Not to try. Yoda

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    SW Ohio
    Posts
    22,070
    Quote Originally Posted by Vittorio View Post
    Focus limbs have been the first tentative of evolution in terms of torsional stability made by W&W around year 2002. Difference to Winact carbon was the addition of an extra carbon layer from the curve to tip area, with the purpose to make them less sensitive to torque at full draw. The result was ok, but his made the limbs very hard (not smooth) to draw, and much slower than the Winact carbon, so thy have been quite unsuccesfull in sales and have been discontinued after one year, only.
    agreed--I have both types of limbs and my chrono testing of the FOCUS demonstrate this fact
    SUPPORT OUR TROOPS
    TARGETWORLD/HOYT Staff Shooter
    Proud CEO of Cincinnati Junior Olympians-the first JOAD CLUB
    I buy from BCY

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Mellerstain, Scotland
    Posts
    1,266
    there was a french magazine test that tested both limbs...

    here were the stats, but there is a scan/pdf file somewhere on this site, posted by a fellow archer that would show you the DFC. you can check for your self.

    Well, the main stats of the test went like this: (all 38lbs 70" limbs)
    Speed:
    W&W Focus: 206fps
    W&W Winact: 205 fps
    Hoyt FX: 210fps
    TX40 Gold:212 fps
    Border Premier Carbon:207fps

    Torsional resistance to 15lbs side load (deflection in mm)
    W&W Focus: 6.2mm
    W&W Winact: 5.1mm
    Hoyt FX: 7.3mm
    TX40 Gold: 5.4mm
    Border Premier Carbon: 4.8mm
    Edit:We have also noted although the article has mm in its text, we are under the thinking its more like cm.

    Stored energy:
    W&W Focus: 29.5ftlbs
    W&W Winact: 30ftlbs
    Hoyt FX: 30.5ftlbs
    TX40 Gold:31.5ftlbs
    Border Premier Carbon: 31ftlbs


    my comment to Vittorio

    So if the focus was W&W first attempt at a torsionally stable limb, then the Winact was better! 100% failure... it was 1fps faster. and it stores less energy. My summary is that they must have saved about 100grains of limb mass in the focus as the bow stored less energy.

    After W&W tried to belittle this test, then they started torsional stability. which happened after 2002.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Subic Bay Freeport Philippines
    Posts
    2,586
    sid..would you know what arrows--or at least their gpi--were used for the speed tests?

    also...may i presume the draw weights were all at 38#?

    am just wondering as i cannot get those speeds with my winact and border hex5-h mk2 both pulling 37/38# using mckinney2 725s with a weight of 270 gns..
    two x-factor(25") set-ups with sure-loc supreme/ quest-x /hoyt super rest,cavalier champion II rest,beiter plunger and clicker, soma cex2 29" rod, doinker chubby backweight,fomax damper,jager grips....70" 26# samick athlete limbs..68" 34# border HEX5-H mk2 limbs..32# 68" border CXG limbs...mckinney II 725 arrows...PLUS spigarelli explorer II barebow riser..

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Mellerstain, Scotland
    Posts
    1,266
    im not sure all chronos are calibrated, but on back to back tests, done under the same rules on the same day by the same people, then the data is relative, therefor relivant.
    the actual numbers we can all dispute, (i think they might have been machine shot) but it doesnt detract from the relative nature of the test.

    The idea, that the lateral deflection of the "stiffer" limbs would be a smaller number, means that they were infact some 20% weaker and not stiffer to lateral side loads.

    The copy of the fax we got, that was from Mr Park (W&W) stated that a bow would never be under a 15lb side load, so the test was trivial.

    Our view on that matter would have been, that the 15lbs side load was to establish a sizable deflection reading, to aid in quantifing resistance to side loads. there was an agreement that the sum of 2-5lbs would be a realistic value for real world forces on a bow. but 15 was used to give a sizable movement to measure without expensive gear.

    for example you wont spot much difference in a cars top speed over 10 meters... but you will see it over 2 miles. but it was still present in the 10 meters.

    If you can find the article on this forum, then you will find the parameters that the test conditions were under.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,921
    Thanks for the reply's, Everyone!.....Since I have been replied to by folks that I consider to definitely know what's what with these ILF Recurve limbs, I have another question/questions....When comparing limbs, I see that often one type of limb is said to be alot faster than another, but what is the difference, really?...I dont know if I would consider 5-10 f.p.s. a huge difference in limb speed, on an apple to apples test...Less than 5 f.p.s. isnt enough to warrant a claim, to me, because I'd venture a guess and say that there could be up to 5 f.p.s difference between several sets of the same limb, from the same Manf.??......When Win&Win, or Samick, or whomever brings out a new model of limb, and touts it as being faster than the previous model, is the new and improved limb really so much faster/better that it is worth spending the money on?....I know that these questions are a bit open ended for opinion/discussion, but in a "Dollars spent VS. Return on investment", is a top end limb really worth 2 or 3 times as much money?...If Recurvers need a stable limb, that draws smoothly through the clicker at Their draw length, that makes good speed, in the Real World, it seems that very few would even see real differences between a good entry level limb, and a very expensive top end limb??...Something like a Samick Universal Carbon, or Athlete Carbon, , VS. the Samick Extreme BF??...The Extreme BF is almost 3 times more expensive than the Universal, yet the stability, smoothness at most draw lengths, and arrow speed is so close that it almost seems like a waste of money to buy the top end limb....I'm not a FITA shooter, and probably am missing alot of real world experience on this subject, but it seems to me that when discussing Recurve limbs, the Law of diminishing returns is a very strong factor.....Thanks for the posts, fellow A.T.'rs......Take care...........Harperman
    Those who separate Politics, and Morality, will never understand either one....John Viscount Morley

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    North Idaho
    Posts
    128
    Good post and good questions Harperman.

    I eagerly await the experts' advice/opinions on this one.

    Don

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Harperman View Post
    Something like a Samick Universal Carbon, or Athlete Carbon, , VS. the Samick Extreme BF??...The Extreme BF is almost 3 times more expensive than the Universal, yet the stability, smoothness at most draw lengths, and arrow speed is so close that it almost seems like a waste of money to buy the top end limb.
    The difference bettween Extreme BF, athlete or universal is much more on the material and tolerances of construction than in other things. The same happens with, for example, Hoyt F4 and Hoyt edge (or whatever is the hoyt's name that have the wooden limb at the moment).
    Mathews Conquest Apex SKY TR-7 w/ Inno Ex-prime limbs
    Easton arrows w/ Beiter nocks
    Axcel 3000 Sight w/ MAC Ten Zone / Shibuya Ultima RC w/ Titan aperture
    Rest Futura Infinity/Hoyt superrest - B-Stinger/W&W HMC Plus - Tru Ball Center X release/Soma saker II

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,921
    Quote Originally Posted by Borja1300 View Post
    The difference bettween Extreme BF, athlete or universal is much more on the material and tolerances of construction than in other things. The same happens with, for example, Hoyt F4 and Hoyt edge (or whatever is the hoyt's name that have the wooden limb at the moment).
    Borja, thanks for the post...I hear what Your saying, so to speak, but is the materials and construction really that much better, taking into account the difference in price??...Again, in my own personal Chrono tests, and using other's tests as a reference, basic wood/glass limbs of good construction will usually be within 10-12 f.p.s. of the best, top shelf carbon/foam limbs, in an apples to apples test...Stability is another factor, but it seems that stability/forgiveness can somewhat be catagorized into the area of "Feel"...Smoothness, I cannot really make an intelligent or experienced comment on, because my draw length is under 28"....They all feel pretty smooth to Me...I've owned a couple sets of Top-Shelf limbs, some mid-grade limbs, and a couple sets of wood/glass "Entry" level limbs...I have an OLD set of Hoyt Gold Medalist wood/glass limbs...These limbs pull smooth for Me, are surprisingly quick, and shoot quiet, and sweet....What's in it for Me, to justify $615.00 for a new set of top shelf Hoyt limbs?.....Lets keep in mind that the top level shooters do need every last point that They can wring out of Their gear, and can tell the difference, but what about the other 99.5% of "US"??.....I'd like for a few good Archers to post on here, and share with "US", how they gained points, and were better shooters after spending the big bucks for a top shelf set of limbs, VS. the mid-grade limbs....Not trying to be argueing for arguments sake, I'm actually debating on a limb purchase, and I'm re-evaluating WHY??..Will it really help??...Thanks!..........Take Care!.......Harperman
    Those who separate Politics, and Morality, will never understand either one....John Viscount Morley

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Harperman View Post
    Borja, thanks for the post...I hear what Your saying, so to speak, but is the materials and construction really that much better, taking into account the difference in price??...Again, in my own personal Chrono tests, and using other's tests as a reference, basic wood/glass limbs of good construction will usually be within 10-12 f.p.s. of the best, top shelf carbon/foam limbs, in an apples to apples test...Stability is another factor, but it seems that stability/forgiveness can somewhat be catagorized into the area of "Feel"...Smoothness, I cannot really make an intelligent or experienced comment on, because my draw length is under 28"....They all feel pretty smooth to Me...I've owned a couple sets of Top-Shelf limbs, some mid-grade limbs, and a couple sets of wood/glass "Entry" level limbs...I have an OLD set of Hoyt Gold Medalist wood/glass limbs...These limbs pull smooth for Me, are surprisingly quick, and shoot quiet, and sweet....What's in it for Me, to justify $615.00 for a new set of top shelf Hoyt limbs?.....Lets keep in mind that the top level shooters do need every last point that They can wring out of Their gear, and can tell the difference, but what about the other 99.5% of "US"??.....I'd like for a few good Archers to post on here, and share with "US", how they gained points, and were better shooters after spending the big bucks for a top shelf set of limbs, VS. the mid-grade limbs....Not trying to be argueing for arguments sake, I'm actually debating on a limb purchase, and I'm re-evaluating WHY??..Will it really help??...Thanks!..........Take Care!.......Harperman
    I did my first 1200 (1225) with an old hoyt wooden limbs so they work great. For me, the big difference bettween that old hoyt limbs and other like G3 or Carbon plus or Winex is that the "good" limbs are more confortable to shoot and aim. This not afect the arrow flight but afects the archer and that produce more points in the end. I don't know if you get my point!

    Anyway, I think that with old wooden hoyt limbs (not the new ones) you could make 1300 points with the proper technic and tunning.
    Mathews Conquest Apex SKY TR-7 w/ Inno Ex-prime limbs
    Easton arrows w/ Beiter nocks
    Axcel 3000 Sight w/ MAC Ten Zone / Shibuya Ultima RC w/ Titan aperture
    Rest Futura Infinity/Hoyt superrest - B-Stinger/W&W HMC Plus - Tru Ball Center X release/Soma saker II

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    4,921
    Quote Originally Posted by Borja1300 View Post
    I did my first 1200 (1225) with an old hoyt wooden limbs so they work great. For me, the big difference bettween that old hoyt limbs and other like G3 or Carbon plus or Winex is that the "good" limbs are more confortable to shoot and aim. This not afect the arrow flight but afects the archer and that produce more points in the end. I don't know if you get my point!

    Anyway, I think that with old wooden hoyt limbs (not the new ones) you could make 1300 points with the proper technic and tunning.
    ...Borja...Thanks for the post...I understand what Your saying, I'm actually just wondering at what point does more $$$ equal a significantly better limb, or put another way, at what point does the Law of diminishing returns kick in hard?...I fully understand that value per Dollar gets less as price increases, and after that it becomes more about "Feel", and little details, that some folks want...It just seems to Me that with most of the top class limbs, the return on the price investment is very low....If money was no object, I'm sure that all of "US" would have TF Apecs, Borders, BF Extremes, Hoyt F4's, etc.etc...But for me, right now, it seems that paying $600.00 plus for a set of limbs, (because they are a few f.p.s. faster, or 5% more torsionally rigid), is a price that is out of proportion to the little bit of extra "Performance" VS. a $250.00-$400.00 limb....I really appreciate Your posts....Thanks for the insight.......Take Care!.......Harperman
    Those who separate Politics, and Morality, will never understand either one....John Viscount Morley

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Maryland USA
    Posts
    38
    Its pretty simple?

    As with the latest technology you are paying for research and development.

    Its the same with all things new and or at the top of line.

    If your gifted, famous, friend, family, lucky or on the inside you may get technology for free to evaluate and promote for the market.

    The rest of us wanting the latest technology will pay a premium price!

  14. #14
    I have put toghether a set of rules to compare limbs that are explained in THA. Also, there you can find relative comparisons by those rules made in on different limbs manufacturers, first, and then on W&W different limbs, only, including Winact and Focus (easy to recognize).
    The parameter I was not able to take in consideration and still now is difficult to properly evaluate is torsional stability, but as far as limbs efficiency is concerned, still my system is showing me good consistency in comparisons.
    Just summarizing, it starts from the principle that the limbs that can tune the same arrow with less poundage are more efficient or "faster", and findings at that time and even now are stil the same, or the fact that the same arrow is tuned between a 2 fps range with any limb, so the variable is the poundage, not the speed.
    Al those numbers from the French magazine above mentioned are probably:
    1) wrong on absolute value (no way to get 208 fps by a TUNED 38# bow, apart form using extremely light very long untuneable arrows)
    2) meaningless for comparison purpose

    Point 2 is simple to explain: an arrow close to the perfect tuning can come out from a bow up to 2ftps faster than an arrow far from a good tuning level.
    So, if the bows under comparison are not fine tuned to that arrow, small speed differences are because of the matching between arrow and bow tuning and not because of limbs efficiency/speed.
    Difference readings in speeds, by the way, are also influenced by the reading of the chrono, that is influenced by the angle of the arrow travelling inside the measuring area.
    It means that if you fine tune the bow, the final exit speed becomes very consistent in between limbs, but the big variable will be the poundage (and a minor one the brace of the limbs). If the measured speed is different, is quite easy to test that changing the arrow spine within the same
    arrow weight range, will show you different arrow speeds depending from the arrows, not from the limbs.
    ______________________________ _______________
    Do or don't do. Not to try. Yoda

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Mellerstain, Scotland
    Posts
    1,266
    Vittorio:
    "The parameter I was not able to take in consideration and still now is difficult to properly evaluate is torsional stability"

    Torsional stability is WAY easier to measure than speed or efficency.... its a very simple deflection test by adding a side load of yrou choice o the limb tip.
    Clamp the limb butt down, pull a fish scale on the limb tip to a value of say 10lbs, and measure the deflection and repeat on all limbs in a test.

    easy.

    I dont know why limb tests need to be so dam mystical.

    this method of torsional stability has been publicaly published in 2002 in a magazine. That french test was condicted by and employee at LAS (european archery distributor) (not Lanaster archery)

    You dont need accelerometers, and expensive high speed gear to work out whats good in a bow.

    bow scale, tape measure, and some clamping method, and a pen and paper.
    Bow and Arrow, you can measure vertical string stability, torsional resistnace and smoothness in one easy swoop...

    Its just a shame there is soo much myth in bows that no one has any faith in data published, but we think you can do it yourself at home...

  16. #16
    I have mentioned in THA the system of using a weight to load the tip on side to measure torsional stability, but the problem, again, is that that static measure does not really tell if limbs are torsionally more stable or less stable, in terms of a finger release at full draw.
    Everybody tests the limbs by the easy way to torque the tip and "feel" its resistence to torque. But, this should be done first with a stringed bow (were you can also test vertical stability) and then at full draw, were a bad release will need the torsional stbaility you are looking for.
    What really happens is that manufacuturers are mainly working on limbs curve and curve stiffness to get this result (Focus are a good example of this basic idea), while in the reality the problem is not how stiff the limbs are to lateral forces, but how long they need to get back to the line after a bad release.
    Suppose you have limbs very rigid from half to tip,as some model in the market. Static lateral rigidity may be very god, but the movemnt of the tip goes down to middle of the limb when forced, so half of the entire limb has to get back to the line after the bad release. From the other side, if only a small part of the final curve close to the tip is torquing, but the rest of the limbs is very rigid, the line will be recovered faster than in case one.
    For instance, FX limbs were very week close to tips, but very strong in the remaining part. So, they were torsionally stable (despite the feeling and static measurs), but their porblem was instead in vertical stability, for the same reason of the week tips.
    As menitioned, several limbs in the market are very stiff in the curve to tip part, but this does not make them all more torsionally stable in the dynamic term.
    And up to now, only practical testing by top level archers can tell you what is comaratively better. IMHO.
    ______________________________ _______________
    Do or don't do. Not to try. Yoda

  17. #17
    Torsional stability is WAY easier to measure than speed or efficency.... its a very simple deflection test by adding a side load of yrou choice o the limb tip.
    There is a difference between Static torsional stability and Dynamic torsional stability just as there is between a Static draw force curve and a Dynamic shoot (?) force curve. More attention is paid to Static measurements, even though they are much less relevant, purely because they are easier to measure.

    As an archer with a 38# draw (and short 26.5" arrow shafts) 208fps is for me in the land of wishful thinking.

    Find Vittorio's argument that the measurement of limb efficiency is in terms of required poundage not FPS totally convincing in the context of a good bow - arrow setup.

    an arrow close to the perfect tuning can come out from a bow up to 2ftps faster than an arrow far from a good tuning level.
    Here I quibble - The measured arrow speed out from a bow close to perfect tuning can be up to 2 FPS more than a poorly tuned set up. The actual arrow speed (speed of centre of mass) probably much the same in both cases.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Mellerstain, Scotland
    Posts
    1,266
    JoeT & Vittorio:

    If you clamp the limb butt you get to measure the tip deflection... This tip deflection is from limb butt to limb tip, so although the measurement is a static one, it is a huge indicator of the ability of the limb to regain its alignment.
    i wasnt even suggesting that a stiff tip is good, while the mid limb is like a sponge. That defeats the object.

    The concept of a limb with good torsional stability would be seen easily with a whole look at the limb... i dont see it really being any more complex. afterall in that bow test, we proved that speed does not need to come at the expense of stability and we prooved that over the FX.
    Afterall we were faster than the "fastest limb in the world".

    Limb efficency has nothing to do with torsional stability.

    Efficency is a dynamic event. energy input vs output. for that you need output! easy...
    Efficency though is just a dynamic return to the amount of stored energy.
    It has nothing to do with the weight on your fingers or the feel of the approach to that weight.
    For example, our limbs have extra mass in them to increase torsional stability... we could increase efficency without it, but we would loose "friendlyness" This is the trick in good limb design and this is where top end limbs gain in R&D time, and i fully understand that trickle down technology falls onto cheaper products.
    The is little difference between top middle and bottom end products due to the true lack of innovation in recurves... the basic limb construction, and profile/geometry hasnt been approached in the last 20 odd years, so thats 20 odd years of trickle down technology...

    The FX was a limb out in 2002, and cost 400+ pounds, we have only just topped that price tag in the last couple of years, so without funding innovation slows down...


    JoeT there are two topics here... Torsional stability is measureable by way of static measurements, torsion is by its very definition is a static measurement. (load X distance ect) and efficency is a different bag altogther. light mass limbs help considerably here

    The focus was not as stable as the Winact, and for us is evident in the sales life of the product.

  19. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe T View Post
    Here I quibble - The measured arrow speed out from a bow close to perfect tuning can be up to 2 FPS more than a poorly tuned set up. The actual arrow speed (speed of centre of mass) probably much the same in both cases.
    I have mixed feelings about this. One saying you are right, and the measured difference in speed is just a different measure form the chrono becuse of arrow angle or flex. The other says that in a poorly tuned bow the arrow leaves more energy against the plunger and rest than in a well tuned one.
    Suppose we need someone from chrono manufaturers to analize 1) in order to know if 2 is more or less relevant.
    ______________________________ _______________
    Do or don't do. Not to try. Yoda

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Mellerstain, Scotland
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Vittorio View Post
    I have mixed feelings about this. One saying you are right, and the measured difference in speed is just a different measure form the chrono becuse of arrow angle or flex. The other says that in a poorly tuned bow the arrow leaves more energy against the plunger and rest than in a well tuned one.
    Suppose we need someone from chrono manufaturers to analize 1) in order to know if 2 is more or less relevant.
    If your compairing two bows then you would be looking for more than 2fps to say it has a benefit.

Similar Threads

  1. Winact Focus limbs FS/FT
    By Harperman in forum F.I.T.A. Classified
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: April 6th, 2010, 12:24 AM
  2. FS WW WInact Focus Limbs
    By dkard in forum Traditional Gear For Sale or Trade
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: July 8th, 2008, 05:11 PM
  3. FS: 40# W&W Winact Focus Limbs - Medium
    By MacOfNiagara in forum F.I.T.A. Classified
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 28th, 2007, 02:52 PM
  4. W&W Winact Focus 40# med.
    By abbgdr in forum F.I.T.A. Classified
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 2nd, 2007, 06:51 PM
  5. New W&W Winact Focus limbs 38-40-42 med 40 long
    By 1bjd in forum F.I.T.A. Classified
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: February 13th, 2007, 02:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •