Voting and Test Procedure
Choosing the ten bows (two categories - 5 bows each) for the Head2Head Bow Test is done through a voting process right here on BOWSITE.COM. This year we asked for two votes from each Bowsiter - One vote for a bow that has an advertised IBO speed of at least 335 fps and one vote for a bow under 335 fps IBO. I used the manufacturer’s lowest advertised IBO speed to place them into one of the two categories. For instance the Bear Attack has an IBO range that spans both categories, however, I placed it in the Shooter’s Bows category because its lowest IBO number fell below 335 fps.
The poll was conducted in the same manner as last year - that is, voters not only chose the manufacturer but they also chose the model to be tested. Here is the official voting thread posted on February 6th of this year:
We rely completely on the Bowsite for our votes and eventual test bow lineup. Once the bows are selected for each category I add an additional bow as my “Wild card”. The first year I picked a wildcard (Bear Instinct) it ended up placing very well and only retailed for approximately $399.00!
Subjective tests were conducted with each bow set to a 28” draw length and 65 pound draw weight. Why 28/65? Several reasons. First, a 28” draw length is more common than a 30” draw length according to many manufacturers polled on the subject. Second, finding a tester with a 28” draw length is much easier than finding one with a 30” draw length. The 65-pound draw weight is also very common with today’s hunters and is easier to handle through the entire test.
Each evaluator worked separately through all four categories. A blindfold was used to keep brand loyalty at bay and was worn from the beginning to the end of each session (draw cycle, balance & feel, etc.). Evaluators were not permitted to see the bows until after they were done with their evaluation. Following is an example of how the testing was performed:
Example of the “draw cycle” category process:
- The evaluator is blindfolded.
- He is handed a bow to draw.
- The bow is handed back to the helper and the evaluator is given a second bow to draw.
- The evaluator chooses between the two.
- The one that is not chosen as “best” between the two is put through the same process with the next bow in line.
- Both are drawn and one is chosen.
- Again, the one that is chosen is put up against the next bow in line.
This process is continued until only a single bow remains. The bow that remains is the evaluator’s #1 pick for that category. That bow is then taken out of the testing. The entire process is completed again for the remaining bows until only one remains, which becomes the evaluator’s #2 overall pick for that category. This process is repeated until all bows have been placed/ranked.
Each evaluator’s results are then scored. This was done by simply inverting the numbers of the rankings and rewarding points for each ranking. For example:
1. Evaluator’s #1 Pick
2. Evaluator’s #2 Pick
3. Evaluator’s #3 Pick
4. Evaluator’s #4 Pick
5. Evaluator’s #5 Pick
6. Evaluator’s #6 Pick
The bows would then be given the following scores for one evaluator for the draw category:
1. #1 Pick - 6 points
2. #2 Pick - 5 points
3. #3 Pick - 4 points
4. #4 Pick - 3 points
5. #5 Pick - 2 points
6. #6 Pick - 1 point
The points are totaled for all evaluators in each category. The bow with the highest number of total points in that category is rated #1 and so on down the line to #6. In this way we are able to get a true ranking for each category based on the results from all evaluators.
Speed is tested in the following manner (28/65 with 350 and 425 grain arrows):
- Just to make sure the bow is at least in the right ballpark the draw weight and draw length are roughly verified with Easton’s Hand Held Bow Weight Scale and a simple draw length arrow correlated to a mark on the shelf equaling the deepest part of the grip. This saves me a lot of time if the bow is not close to the right draw length or draw weight.
- Brace height is tested using calibrated dial calipers
- Verify draw weight using a calibrated digital force gauge
- Verify draw length using my Silks Outdoors Bow Analysis Program, which is a combination of a custom software package, modified Apple Bow Drawing Machine, Chatillon force gauge, calibrated 36” steel rule and trammel point
- Mark cams at full draw
- Install New Archery Products Quik Tune 3000 Arrow Rest
- Set nock point
- Set bow on Spot Hogg’s Hooter Shooter portable shooting machine - draw to cam marks and fire through two chronographs - Pro Chrono and Easton. Both chronographs are equipped with indoor lighting kits.
- Speed is recorded from the mean of both chronographs over 5 shots - see the velocity stats graphs.
*As a side note: I also tested all of the bows by hand. Same basic procedure as above except I shot the bow by hand through both chronographs rather than using the Hooter Shooter. I am not sure if it because of the placement of the arrow through the screens or that I draw further than the marks on the cams but my hand drawn numbers were always a couple of feet per second faster on average than those from the Hooter Shooter. I also ran my hand drawn numbers through the same statistical program as the Hooter Shooter numbers and found that statistically speaking my hand shooting is as consistent as the Hooter Shooter. Still, I only used the Hooter Shooter numbers for the results.
In the event that a bow that does not meet the draw length spec, either short or long, I will contact the manufacturer and get a module that brings them into spec or just get another bow altogether. Strings and cables are not tweaked to bring a bow into spec unless the manufacturer asks me to do so. The same goes for a bow that has “out of tune” cams- a term that is commonly used in referencing the timing, synchronization, etc of the bow’s eccentric system.
I also want the readers to understand where I stand as a writer in hopes that it will eliminate or at least minimize the absurd speculations that seem to pop up every year when the H2H is posted. According to some I am somehow biased to one company or another and some folks have gone as far as accusing me of being bought-off by a certain manufacturer (usually the one that won that year). Let me introduce you to reality - the archery world does not spin that way - at least not for me. I do not have any manufacturers courting me in any way and none have offered to pay me to make them look better. It simply does not happen.