Archery Talk Forum banner

1 - 20 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,395 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Doesn't the FLX technology actually "undo" the benefits of adding speed to the bow?

Seems to me that the main "benefit" of a roller is to add power by holding the cables in place. I must be missing something here....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
I don't know about "undo", but I believe the 2010 Admiral IBO FPS is rated slightly higher than the 2009. So either the gain is due to the FLX, or BT added in another change to slightly increase the FPS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,754 Posts
I always thought the main benefit of the rollerguard was to reduce cable wear and friction.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,862 Posts
On the Destroyer anyway, the cables are still held in place allowing a little extra preload during the draw cycle. They don't look to be held too close to the riser though like last year's CP bows. The FLX guard will naturally allow some give towards the arrow, it's why it works but still "traps" the cables some for extra speed. I think the FLX Guard is a big improvement over conventional cable rods and roller guards. I wouldn't be suprized in seeing this set up on other company's bows in the future or something that does the same thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,473 Posts
I see the FLX guards as a bandaid personally. It's there to fix a problem that shouldn't even exist in a well engineered bow in the first damned place. :confused: BowTech does it again, and they'll market it as the best improvement in compound tech since cams....and some dummies are going to fall for it. :pukey: Just like the "overdrive binary" silliness.....just go ahead and redesign the cable take ups to do the same damned thing with fewer parts, less expense, etc....:pukey::pukey:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,562 Posts
I see the FLX guards as a bandaid personally. It's there to fix a problem that shouldn't even exist in a well engineered bow in the first damned place. :confused: BowTech does it again, and they'll market it as the best improvement in compound tech since cams....and some dummies are going to fall for it. :pukey: Just like the "overdrive binary" silliness.....just go ahead and redesign the cable take ups to do the same damned thing with fewer parts, less expense, etc....:pukey::pukey:
Harsh but I see your point.

I have shot mainly Bowtech's for the last 5 years but I do agree it is a fix to a problem that should never of happened.

I am much happier with a cable rod and a slider.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,395 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
I see the FLX guards as a bandaid personally. It's there to fix a problem that shouldn't even exist in a well engineered bow in the first damned place. :confused: BowTech does it again, and they'll market it as the best improvement in compound tech since cams....and some dummies are going to fall for it. :pukey: Just like the "overdrive binary" silliness.....just go ahead and redesign the cable take ups to do the same damned thing with fewer parts, less expense, etc....:pukey::pukey:
Interesting take, I'm kind of with your viewpoint as well.
As far as the FLX band-aid solution... Could you elaborate on how & why their (BowTech's) roller guard bows have a problem in the first place, along with the ultimate engineering solution (if there is one) as you see it.

Specifically I'm asking this with regards to their center pivot bows such as the 2009 Admiral? - Which I've had the "downhill sliding pleasure" and frustrations of dealing with this year! My experience with it (the Admiral) "raises an eyebrow" as I ponder I may have been one of those "dummies" as you ever so eloquently put it.:eek:

And... What is your opinion overall with regards to roller guards. (Because many if not most of the brands are now adding them to their hottest 2010 short ATA models.)

PS: I am a deer hunter in New-England, and thus don't need to realistically shoot out past 40 yards. (Realistically, that's probably all I'm good for anyways) Hence, I like short ATA bows with a solid wall, decent let-off with a valley that holds well. That's why I've always ended up buying the BowTechs. At least up to now... -Loved my last one too before this one, I might add! Haven't found anything else thus far, but I'm always looking for a better hunting setup that fits me....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,311 Posts
I see the FLX guards as a bandaid personally.
The way I personally see it is that until arrows can magically pass through cables without a device (cable slide, rollers, FLX, etc) that pulls the cables over for arrow clearance...is a bandaid. :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,248 Posts
Doesn't the FLX technology actually "undo" the benefits of adding speed to the bow?

Seems to me that the main "benefit" of a roller is to add power by holding the cables in place. I must be missing something here....
roller guard has nothing to do with power. being offset they only create torque, which is not good. but needed for fletch clearance obviously unless you use a shoot through system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,473 Posts
Interesting take, I'm kind of with your viewpoint as well.
As far as the FLX band-aid solution... Could you elaborate on how & why their (BowTech's) roller guard bows have a problem in the first place, along with the ultimate engineering solution (if there is one) as you see it.

Specifically I'm asking this with regards to their center pivot bows such as the 2009 Admiral? - Which I've had the "downhill sliding pleasure" and frustrations of dealing with this year. My experience with it "raises an eyebrow" as I ponder I may have been one of those "dummies" as you ever so eloquently put it.:eek:
No offense intended, dummy. :lol:

What their past roller guards have done is create a torque load in the riser, causing your bow to tune inside of center....it does, doesn't it? :wink: Adding a FLX allows the cables to migrate toward the center to eliminate some of this cable torque, allowing the bow to tune more towards center in theory. Adding a cable rod and slide would have prevented all this in the first place. Or even a shoot through cam system would, too. Search for "TAP"'s posts on making and selling shoot through rollers so he could actually get his CP, roller-equipped BTs to bareshaft tune. :mg:

Rollers are gimmicks really, since they've been around longer than Mathew's and BowTech combined and nobody else has wanted to use them for some reason. :wink:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,914 Posts
Seems to me that every improvement....or "innovation"....is really just a band aid to fix something that needed improved from the last year. Singling out BowTech's flex guard from every other "fix" or "improvement" doesn't make any sense unless you have something personal against BowTech.


And to respond to the original question.... Roller guards prevent the cables from moving rearward during the draw cycle like they do with a cable slide. The FLX guard still prevents the cables from moving rearward during the draw, it just flexes towards the center of the bow when tension is transferred to the cables. In my opinion, any bow would benefit from this.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,473 Posts
The way I personally see it is that until arrows can magically pass through cables without a device (cable slide, rollers, FLX, etc) that pulls the cables over for arrow clearance...is a bandaid. :wink:
Ahhh, but some bandaids are certainly better than others, right? :wink: Cable rods don't induce the torque to the system that rollers do and are less expensive to build.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,473 Posts
Seems to me that every improvement....or "innovation"....is really just a band aid to fix something that needed improved from the last year. Singling out BowTech's flex guard from every other "fix" or "improvement" doesn't make any sense unless you have something personal against BowTech.
Now, Mr. Morgan, that is just SOOooooo not true. I couldn't care less WHO is doing the bandaiding, just that it's being done.

BT sold lots of bows last year costing $800+ that were not able to be tuned properly by very good shooters. And TAP, for instance, has started selling aftermarket rollers to reduce the torque and make them capable of being tuned fully. This is totally unacceptable in a machine that cost that much, regardless of who made it. It shows a lack of testing and proves, to me anyway, that their engineering is second rate. If they didn't notice the issue before selling them they have internal issues. If they knew and still sold them they have even worse internal issues.

I love Hoyt's products, but if their engineering and testing was that shoddy I'd say the same things about them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,401 Posts
Ahhh, but some bandaids are certainly better than others, right? :wink: Cable rods don't induce the torque to the system that rollers do and are less expensive to build.
i personally like having the ability to rotate cable guard in order to get minimum clearance needed for all different types/sizes of fletching
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,473 Posts
i personally like having the ability to rotate cable guard in order to get minimum clearance needed for all different types/sizes of fletching
Me, too. I've replaced the straight carbon rods on most of my Hoyts to the offset stainless rods. You can then move them in if you don't need the extra clearance and even further reduce torque.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,395 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
No offense intended, dummy. :lol:

What their past roller guards have done is create a torque load in the riser, causing your bow to tune inside of center....it does, doesn't it? :wink: Adding a FLX allows the cables to migrate toward the center to eliminate some of this cable torque, allowing the bow to tune more towards center in theory. Adding a cable rod and slide would have prevented all this in the first place. Or even a shoot through cam system would, too. Search for "TAP"'s posts on making and selling shoot through rollers so he could actually get his CP, roller-equipped BTs to bareshaft tune. :mg:

Rollers are gimmicks really, since they've been around longer than Mathew's and BowTech combined and nobody else has wanted to use them for some reason. :wink:
Have been contemplating the TAP shoot-thru. Just not convinced as it is a one-way transition with a cam swap. (also hung up about the re-loading fast from a sling in a tree, even though I'm told not a biggie.) Can't get the valley feel out of the A/M, and I am told the Maxxis is the same (but it too now has a cable roller.) Don't like the added weight of a setup z7. (Like the single cam, but I've never been a real Matthews believer anyways.) I've even thought of being stupid and trading in for a 2010 FLX, but then I can't go to a shoot-thru if things aren't really much better. Don't want to end up "guinea-pigging" it either for them. Call me picky, but to me, it's all about feeling both comfortable and confident while making that good shot out of the tree.

I think that the one and only thing that has really put a "hair across my arse" with regards to B/T - No upgrading the 09's to try the solution without getting a new bow, due to the only noticeable change - the guard mount redesign. Particularly in view of the replies here on A/T that it really "a problem that doesn't exist" as I've been lectured over and over again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,914 Posts
Now, Mr. Morgan, that is just SOOooooo not true. I couldn't care less WHO is doing the bandaiding, just that it's being done.

BT sold lots of bows last year costing $800+ that were not able to be tuned properly by very good shooters. And TAP, for instance, has started selling aftermarket rollers to reduce the torque and make them capable of being tuned fully. This is totally unacceptable in a machine that cost that much, regardless of who made it. It shows a lack of testing and proves, to me anyway, that their engineering is second rate. If they didn't notice the issue before selling them they have internal issues. If they knew and still sold them they have even worse internal issues.

I love Hoyt's products, but if their engineering and testing was that shoddy I'd say the same things about them.
I've tuned many a Sentinel and Captain to shoot a bullet hole. So have hundreds of others. I'm not doubting that TAP couldn't get his to tune. But who's to say that particular bow just didn't work for him? Heck, I can't get OnTarget to print half the time with Vista....is that from shoddy programming and testing? Heaven forbid he build a patch to fix it...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
47,473 Posts
I've tuned many a Sentinel and Captain to shoot a bullet hole. So have hundreds of others. I'm not doubting that TAP couldn't get his to tune. But who's to say that particular bow just didn't work for him? Heck, I can't get OnTarget to print half the time with Vista....is that from shoddy programming and testing? Heaven forbid he build a patch to fix it...
:D

Don't know about his programming expertise, I've been using OT2. :lol:

But isn't a $800 bow supposed to NOT be a lemon? QCs on strike or something? :lol: But TAP's been selling those rollers, so his sure isn't the only one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,914 Posts
:D

Don't know about his programming expertise, I've been using OT2. :lol:

But isn't a $800 bow supposed to NOT be a lemon? QCs on strike or something? :lol: But TAP's been selling those rollers, so his sure isn't the only one.
All I know is my Sentinel isn't a lemon and I've never seen the problems he's had. Not to say he hasn't had them, but not everyone has. Campanies can't recall entire lines because "some" of their customers can't get the bows to tune. I'd say if there was a problem with every single bow, then they's have to do something to fix everyone's problem.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,395 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
No offense intended, dummy. :lol:

What their past roller guards have done is create a torque load in the riser, causing your bow to tune inside of center....it does, doesn't it? :wink: Adding a FLX allows the cables to migrate toward the center to eliminate some of this cable torque, allowing the bow to tune more towards center in theory. Adding a cable rod and slide would have prevented all this in the first place. Or even a shoot through cam system would, too. Search for "TAP"'s posts on making and selling shoot through rollers so he could actually get his CP, roller-equipped BTs to bareshaft tune. :mg:

Rollers are gimmicks really, since they've been around longer than Mathew's and BowTech combined and nobody else has wanted to use them for some reason. :wink:
That exactly what got me freaking out about this bow. Due to tuning issues, I began trying all sorts of things. When I put a bare shaft through the bow I was literally amazed at the results. (It didn't matter where the rest was placed I must add.)

I've also never owned a bow that seems to "degrade" the more it is shot, even after cables and strings are checked for good sync. etc.! It was the guy from TAP who mentioned all the lateral pull from the rollers along with 2500+ shots has probably resulted in "lumpy bearings" which may be the results and root of my "grouping degradation" over time.)
 
1 - 20 of 90 Posts
Top