Carbon Express Maxima Arrow Spine
Posted 08 June 2007 - 11:45 AM
As you folks will remember, we had a topic about the spine of original CX Maxima arrows running stiff and/or Mathews newest single cam bows not being as "hard" of a cam as in the past.
Well, I downloaded and installed the latest update for my "OnTarget2! Software for Archers" and there it was plain as day! The spine match chart within the software now shows the Maxima 250 to be the best match for my set-up and the 350 to be noticeably over-spined.
Mind you, both the CX shop spine charts and the software used to say that the 350 was the best match for my set-up and that the 250 was way under-spined. Of course, when tuning and shooting I found this not to be the case at all. It was actually the 250 that performed, not the 350. Now I have some further piece of mind as to why!
Here's a look at what I saw...
(Version 2.3.3 is loaded on my notebook and I just loaded version 2.3.71 on my desktop. Both have the exact same Switchback XT set-up plugged into them.)
I am not sure yet what has been updated within the software... The cam on the bow(s), the spine on the arrow(s), or both. But, I will be e-mailing Larry Clague (SFA top dog) to ask. I'll be sure to report my findings. Either way, y'all who fall into the same set-up bracket as me who just upgraded to Maxima 250's just cuz I said so did good.
Posted 08 June 2007 - 12:38 PM
Here in lies a basic truth that has served me well through the years.
A mathematical model of any real world situation is only as accurate as the assumptions used to create it. Here clearly the past assumptions of what setup the 350 arrow should fit were clearly in error.
Typically when such cases are uncovered through real world experience the developers of predictive software undergo denial, disbelief and even accusatory modes. It's truly ironic that the thing more predictive than their software, is their behavior. I have experienced this exact situation so many times, that recalling all of the instances would undoubtedly make me vomit.
Unfortunately, programmers especially, seem to have the nasty habit of merely programming in exceptions versus actually trying to discover what assumptions they initially made that were wrong. This means they have coded in special exceptions without any consideration for what actually made the exception special (ie. if BOW=Matthews then DO THIS). This kind of stuff would infuriate me. Whoa to the programmer who tried that stunt with me. I never accepted that as a real fix. But unfortunately, lots of bosses do. Hence, we have tons of simulation software out there that has "holes" in it because they can't possibly keep up with the number of exceptions appearing on the market every day. There wouldn't be any exceptions if the assumptions were correct. You'd think that would be obvious, but trust me, it's NOT!
Bottomline, though it appears the "Ontarget2" software has been fixed, I wouldn't bet on it. Odds are very very good that sooner or later you'll run into another "exception".
Posted 08 June 2007 - 01:30 PM
This case was simply the worst I've seen. The Carbon Express shaft selector charts at all of the local bow shops are saying the same thing that the old version of SFA used to say. So, someone messed up for sure, but it couldn't be helped where SFA is concerned. (They just use the best info available at the time.) Larry has always been good about "updates". I think it's more just understood at this point that what the manufacturer's list and what the real numbers are seem to avoid each other.
Posted 09 June 2007 - 03:25 PM
Well, I guess they'll be no need to e-mail Larry as he has registered for the forums. I'll let him explain.
V233 had a bug (fixed in V235) where effects of percent letoff were applyed backwards...IE: 80% was treated like 55% and vice versa. If your bow had 65% letoff, there was no impact to shaft selection.
And yes, there will undoubtly be other bugs discovered...software is always something of a work in progress. In case anyone has bugs to report, there are links on the Pinwheel website to do this...the ones for "info" and "support" are good ones. User records that contain the data causing the "bug" are helpful, too...
Posted 10 June 2007 - 01:18 PM
Very cool of you to reply here. Welcome to the board.
I'll try to stop by the forums to check for questions or issues with the OT2 software. Anyone in a hurry to get a response to a question is welcome to contact me directly.
Posted 17 June 2007 - 08:39 PM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users