2011 Onza 3 STS placement vs. cable clearance
I have a 2011 Onza 3, with the TRG replaced by a normal cable guard rod and a separate STS (string stop) at the factory. I just checked the Onza 3 video for 2012 and I am glad to see that one issue that I would call a design flaw has been improved.
On my Onza 3, the slot for STS attachment has been machined on the right side of the bow (the bow is right-handed). Well, no problem as long as you use the standard cable slide. However, I decided to try a different cable slide (a Hoyt model) that brings the cables closer to the centerline; the fletching clearance with the original is excessive and I think it would be better to only have the clearance that is really needed and thus minimize the cable guard induced torque. (By the way, it really made a difference: I had to adjust my sight pins much closer to the centerline when using this slide). Problem is, now I have one cable rubbing the STS rod. There would be no problem if:
1) the slot for the STS would have been machined to the left side of the bow, or to the centerline of the riser, or
2) the bend of the STS bar would be closer to the riser (yes, the rod has a bend in it but in a wrong place!). This would also solve the problem.
The 2012 model has the hole for STS placement in the center of the riser which is much better. However, the 2012 STS is a thick rod so I wonder if it could also cause a similar trouble if you try to reduce excessive fletching clearance.
I may post pictures later. My message to Martin Archery: more attention to details, please. Even though I know the 2011 model was originally designed for the different kind of TRG arrangement.
Last edited by Phantonza; 05-07-2012 at 02:22 AM.
Rytera Nemesis, 2012
Martin Onza 3, 2011
Hoyt CRX 32, 2011 (SOLD)
Martin Phantom II, 2003