FC400 vs Crossfire

[HawgEnvy]

just loooking at the web page. Why the difference in the IBO rating. Crossfire 30.5" AtA,nitro 2.0 cams,320-325fps. FC400 32.5" AtA,nitro 2.0 cams,335-345 IBO. I'm not currently in the market for a new bow, but for some reason the Crossfire appeals to me. Maybe it's because it seems to be ignored.

[Arrow Splitter]

That's a good question. I wouldn't think that the ATA would be the difference, but I guess it could be.

A.S

[HawgEnvy]

it just confuses me since the AtA seems to be the only diff in the specs. BH is the same also

[HawgEnvy]

someone must be able to explain this

[Ehunter]

My guess would be that with the shorter ATA, it's a slightly less efficient bow. Shorter power stroke, even though the brace is the same maybe. Probably a different riser/limb geometry that makes it less efficient.

[Arrow Splitter]

My guess would be that with the shorter ATA, it's a slightly less efficient bow. Shorter power stroke, even though the brace is the same maybe. Probably a different riser/limb geometry that makes it less efficient.

That makes sense.

[MLN1963]

My guess would be that with the shorter ATA, it's a slightly less efficient bow. Shorter power stroke, even though the brace is the same maybe. Probably a different riser/limb geometry that makes it less efficient.

The Onza 3 is longer A2A than my FC400 but it is slower IBO so I can't break the code.

[HawgEnvy]

anyone have Joel's #? It really is bugging me that much and my OCD won't let it rest til I get to the bottom of the mystery. Where's Columbo n Monk when you need 'em?

[cjchasman]

Riser configuration looks different to me. The FC appears flatter (perpendicular) at the limb pockets causing the limbs to be more parallel. And from what I've heard the parallel limb design is more energy efficient. Less shock more thrust???? Just guessin'.
One more thing...was there any speed assist on the FC like speed nocs?

[HawgEnvy]

not sure about the speed assist. I was comparing the specs on the web page