How to distinguish "bad shooting" from "bad spine"?
To tune arrows, one should shoot bare shafts (so called "bare shaft test") onto a target. If it's left or right of your "aiming-point", you should adjust the dynamic spine accordingly.
I'm afraid that my subconscious will mess up the bare shafts. How can I distinguish "wrong spinned shafts" from just badly shot arrows?
2 answers
You are accessing this answer with a direct link, so it's being shown above all other answers regardless of its score. You can return to the normal view.
There are table widely available to figure out the ideal spine for the archer/bow.
I don't quite believe in the "bare shaft shooting" because as M'vy said, there are defects in shafts, vanes, nocks, points and even weight difference would affect the grouping. The best thing I find is to fetch them and shoot. Number your arrows and check which ones are off the group.
I believe spines above or below the ideal wouldn't make much difference, at least for barebows or olympic recurves unless you're shooting in the olympics.
I shoot barebow for Field and compound for target and, as a comparison, I don't spend nearly as much time working on my field arrows then I do for my target arrows (specially the indoors).
There are also little tricks you can apply to your arrow tuning like heavier points with smaller vanes, shorter or longer arrows (always leaving some safety clearance) and so on.
This post was sourced from https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/a/10996. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
According to this guide, it is recommended when testing to first shoot with fletched arrows before shooting with the unfletched ones, always aiming at the same point. It gives you a control group to compare with the bare ones.
Defects in the spine or nocking point position should affect the flight significantly enough to be able to distinguish it from bad aim.
When there can be errors, statistics are your friend.
This post was sourced from https://outdoors.stackexchange.com/a/10991. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.
0 comment threads
0 comment threads