Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Martin Hunter Brace Height

  1. #1
    aYak
    Guest

    Question Martin Hunter Brace Height

    I've noticed on the Martin site there is a '2001' traditional manual sheet with one set of BH specs (seemingly longer) and a '2006' traditional manual with a different set of BH specs (shorter than the 2001 specs).

    Having just purchased an X-200 and Hunter (both 2005 models), I'm wondering which specs to use for my starting 'low' then working 'up' #?

    2001 Manual Specs
    X200 - > 8" -8 3/4"
    Hunter - > 7 3/4" - 8 1/2"

    2006 Manual Specs
    X200 - > 7 3/4" - 8 1/2"
    Hunter - > 7" - 7 3/4"

    Thanks,
    Andy

  2. #2
    Curtis
    Guest

    Default Same with my Dreamcatcher

    Hi Andy,

    I noticed that the same is true for my Dreamcatcher. I wrote an email to Martin and will let you know when and what they replied.
    But if someone around here can answer this I would appreciate it!

    Kurt

  3. #3
    aYak
    Guest

    Default

    Kurt,
    I received a very brief message from JoelC (Martin Technical Support) indicating to use the 2006 specs, but I sure would like to know not only the reason, but also which specific model year is the cut-off. I seems like my 2005 Hunter shoots best (hand shock and arrow flight) with the bigger brace-height range than the new lower specifications.

    My Hunter serial # starts with HH5xxx, so I'm assuming it is a 2005 model.
    I wonder if it has something to do with most manufacturers having long defined AMO string length as
    AMO marked on the bow minus 3"
    while Martin used to be known as/maybe still is
    AMO marked on the Bow minus 4"

    Andy

  4. #4
    Curtis
    Guest

    Default

    Hi Andy,

    I just tried the new brace height, with the Dreamcatcher the old height was given as 8 1/2 to 9, the new height is 7 1/4 to 8.
    I used a height of 8 1/2 and have now changed to 7 3/4 of course I had to adjust the nock but there was no increase in handshock, there was close to none before, but I think there was an noticeable increase in speed!
    But that I have to test when I am at a range where I can measure arrow velocity.
    But it seems logical, by lowering the brace height you reduce the initial tension of the bow also the string is longer in contact with the arrow and therefore the amount of energy transfered to the arrow should increase.
    But due to the higher speed it is maybe more affected by mistakes during the release.

    Kurt

  5. #5
    joeyc
    Guest

    Default

    What length string are you using to get the 7 3/4 in. brace height? I'm using a 60 in. AMO and even with little or no twists, the brace height is 8 in. On the string that originally came with the bow, the lowest height is 8 1/2 in. I currently have it at 8 1/2 in. and it seems to shoot well.

  6. #6
    deanrm
    Guest

    Default

    I asked Larry Hatfield, the plant manager for the Martin (Howatt) factory in Yakama that makes their traditional bows, and he said it had to do with the way that the AMO has changed how string length is measured. I didn't really understand his answer.

    I do know that I used to run a Dacron string on my Dream Catcher and I needed about 8 1/2" of brace height to get rid of the string slapping the belly of the limbs. I switched to one of the new Martin Double Helix strings that now come with the newer Martins, and I reduced the brace height by and inch to 7 1/2". It shoots way better with the new string, quieter and 10 fps faster. I also like to shoot a bow with a lower brace height.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •