PDA

View Full Version : Martin Slayer X



alienshooter
04-16-2013, 09:40 AM
I just wanted to know does anyone know why Martin didn't continue with the X system as they had on the Slayer X? These bows look sick! Anyone who owns one is lucky!

bfisher
04-16-2013, 10:23 AM
I don't know this for fact (Joel does), but X system bows were better suited for the target masses. It just didn't sell well to hunters, who make up better than 90% of the sales. Most saw it and didn't understand it or it's virtues. Many thought they'd cut their cables with a broadhead while loading an arrow. They couldn't think enough to see that you load the arrow through the cables backwards. Then there some that thought it too slow for loading another arrow for a second shot. Most of the people who thought this way had never shot an X cammed bow. They drew their conclusions on what some other Yahoo said on the internet and the rumor lived on.

This is one of the reasons we have to put up with cam lean and the majority of limb failures in bows today. The Nitrous cams fitted with X modules was, IMO, one of the finest systems ever devised for compound bows. Instead of being trashed it should have just been refined a bit to give a draw cycle similar to the Cat/Nitro/Hybrix cams. Oh, and although it wasn't rated as fast as the hybrid cams my 2004 SlayR (325 fps IBO) was still the fastest bow I've ever owned, by 30 fps more than my Hybrix cams.

alienshooter
04-16-2013, 10:53 AM
Thanks for the info bfisher, I just notice how other bow companies utilize the technology and Martin doesn't. Don't get me wrong the Nitro Hybrid cams are awesome (Nitro 3, 3L for me) but like you said everyone talking about "cam lean". I don't have much lean in my alien but my alien x bottom cam has noticeable lean but performs flawless. Like you said Martin could have refined the x system and apply it today, I just wanted to be informed, thanks.

bfisher
04-16-2013, 02:59 PM
On another note I should have told you that Martin was the innovator of the X system, I believe with it's Fury cam. As I understand it the Fury cam was draw length specific but lacked the sloid back wall seen on many of today's cams. The Nitrous cam came out in 2004 and was an upgrade of the Fury and was more aggressive, although not near as hard to draw as most speed cams today. The Nitrous lasted through 2007 when it was replaced by the Furious cam, which was supposed to use the best attributes of the Fury and Nitrous. Somehow it never really caught on. Having never shot a Fury cam I couldn't say why people didn't like it.

Another thing to note is that the Nitrous cam was machined in 3 different sizes (A, B, C) to cover the needed draw length ranges. They all used the same modules. Each cam covered a draw length range of 3" with about 1" of overlap from size to size. Also available were mini-mods which reduced the range of each cam by 2" and often times gave better performance than standard mods. To top it off there were modules available that produced 65% letoff which made some target shooters happy. They could shoot lower peak weight but have enough holding weight to help stabilize the bow for better aiming.

Another advantage of the X system is that because there were dual modules (one on each side of the cam) the cams were mounted in the middle of the limb forks. In other words everything was in the vertical center of the bow which made tuning very simple. It's the only system that allowed me to center the rest with a lazer and sight pins were right down the middle, too. Strings and cables last nearly forever because there is no chafing of the serving from the side load and all the grooves were chamfered or rounded.

Throw all this together with the idea of no cam lean and being able to change or adjust cables without a bow press or turning the limb bolts out and the system was very versatle (spelling). There are many (me included) that would like to see a return of this system, and as I said, more of a draw force curve closer to the Cat/Nitro/Hybrix system.

Ehunter
04-16-2013, 07:19 PM
Very informative Barry. Thanks. I've never seen an X system in person, but from the pics I've seen, they looked like a heck of an idea. Now I know all the reasons why!

typically8
04-16-2013, 09:28 PM
Throw some pics up.

elkslayer4x5
04-17-2013, 10:33 AM
Ok, top cam , both sides, a pic straight on trying to show both modules, and a pic from the nock point looking thru the cables, as Barry said load arrow from the front, I'm one of the few that hunt with a X rigged bow.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/deast-lr/Bow/Topcam_zps30e57292.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/deast-lr/media/Bow/Topcam_zps30e57292.jpg.html)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/deast-lr/Bow/Xmodsandcables_zps85cf0e3f.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/deast-lr/media/Bow/Xmodsandcables_zps85cf0e3f.jpg.html)

alienshooter
04-17-2013, 11:50 AM
I only seen far away pictures not up close one's, thanks elkslayer4x5. The system looks interesting...bfisher explained only if Martin refined this system and now knowing they invented this techonoly is very interesting. I would like to see an updated version in the future for Martin but hopeful thinking.

alienshooter
04-17-2013, 11:51 AM
I only seen far away pictures not up close one's, thanks elkslayer4x5. The system looks interesting...bfisher explained only if Martin refined this system and now knowing they invented this techonoly is very interesting. I would like to see an updated version in the future for Martin but hopeful thinking.

lol technology

elkslayer4x5
04-17-2013, 02:51 PM
As Barry said, these cams were pretty fast, This is a close up of the sight tape ( my own shot in tape ) shown above, this is my 55# Slayer, still have room for another mark. I have a 2X lens on that HHA.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v728/deast-lr/sighttape_zps8f212571.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/deast-lr/media/sighttape_zps8f212571.jpg.html)