>>28308738
Plastic Vanes are good for durability, and drag reduction on the arrow's fletching.

Traditional feather vanes vary wildly in terms of durability, and drag, but tend to weigh less.

Personally, I use plastic ones with every single arrow I own, but I practice often, and need to replace mine about every 6 months (shooting every single weekend)

When I head over to SCA events, I have special arrows I keep on me, to keep it historically correct, along with a traditional recurve (versus my usual takedown recurve).

I've noticed that the feathered arrows tend to stay aloft longer than the plastic counterparts (Mine are 36" with quail fletching, and simple bodkins type heads, whereas the plastic vanes are 34" carbon shaft, with both traditional broadheads, and target points)

>>28308821
That's similar to what I heard from someone that's into it. They said the feather ones can get messed up really easily. I've only used my (plastic vane) arrows for about 3 hours over the course of the month I've had them (it's been cold and I've been sick) and one already has a rip in it, but the arrow rest keeps dislodging so that should be the cause of that.

Feather feltching is more of a gimmick because they are more fragile, less "rifled" (they have less spin) and plastic ones are more sturdy.

>>28309129
I thought the point of the fletching was to stop the arrow from spinning, that's why it's not curled or diagonal, which would make the feather ones less of a gimmick. Was that incorrect?

I would love to get into archery, any tips you guys have for the biggest noob in the universe who doesn't own any equipment yet?

>>28308738
If you're into traditional archery and shooting straight off the shelf or off the hand (i.e. no arrow rest), you'll want feathers. This is because a vane is far more rigid and will deflect off the shelf/hand, fucking up your shot, whereas a feather compresses and springs back when it hits something.

The same goes when you're hunting or shooting field/3D through a gap or something - if a vane nicks a branch or something, it'll deflect whereas a feather will compress and won't deflect to the same extent.

Supposedly feathers stabilise arrows better too because they create more drag than even a vane of the same size.

I shoot blazer vanes with a compound myself, but I've been thinking about trying 4" parabolic feathers mostly because a 4" feather weighs something like 3 grains compared to a 2" blazer vane weighing in at 6 grains, which would give me a little more FOC and maybe a little better control for a fixed blade. Been advised against it by the guy at my local pro shop - he reckons a 340+ fps IBO compound would just regularly fuck up feather fletching and the maintenance burden would get kind of silly. Still intrigued by the idea though - the benefits are great in theory and it'd just plain look cool.

Another thing to consider is that feathers don't work well if they get soaked whereas with vanes (being plastic and all) that's a total non-issue.

Also, worth knowing - you'll pay more for feathers.

>>28309186
Learning to use the bow is not hard (aiming well is though). A video could show you better and faster than an explanation.
Other than the arrows and tips for them, nothing is cheap, and if you want fancy tips they're less cheap.
Actually I heard you could use a hay bale as a target which might be quite a bit cheaper, is that advisable at all?

>>28309151
All fletching generally creates spin, but also is designed to create more drag on the back of the arrow. The degree of spin a fletch imparts is pretty much down to the degree of helical you glue them on with.

My opinion is that feathers aren't a gimmick, just more high maintenance & more expensive and like anything in archery, it's all tradeoffs.

>>28308821

How long are your arms?!

>>28309186

Compound or trad? Target/field/hunting?

>>28309240

Hay bale is of variable advisability. I used tight-packed straw bedding bales for a while - worked well until I went to a faster bow/heavier arrows with higher FOC and started getting full pass-throughs.

Trad bow should be fine but I'd start to get wary about bales with a compound pushing more than 310fps IBO/60+ pounds. Then buying a bag or joining a club is probably a better idea.

obligatory shitpost:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk

let the butthurt flow

>>28309202
>Also, worth knowing - you'll pay more for feathers.
Yeah that was a big thing of it, the guy at the shop said he'd like to sell me feathered ones and acted like they were better, and they cost like $3 more, so I was like "is he just trying to upsell or are they worth it?".
Thanks for the information, I'll stick with vanes for now.

>>28309249
>Compound or trad?

I wouldn't know. But I don't want some tacticool looking thing, but I also don't want a true traditional bow since those things I hear take a lot of upper body strength.

>Target/field/hunting?

Target, at first at least.

>>28309336
All archery takes upper body strength - it's just part of the deal. Even compound - like a fast compound bow will make you pull peak draw weight earlier and for longer than a trad bow before it cams over into the valley. You develop that with time though, whatever kind of archery you shoot. You can also pick your draw weight rather than go straight to a 60# trad bow or 70# + compound. A lot of people start shooting a 40-50# compound or 20-35# recurve.

Trad will take a lot longer to reach hunting accuracy and you'll want to work your way up to shooting at least 40#. If you're going that route, I'd take a modern takedown recurve over a longbow. They're a little easier to get the hang of and you can buy new limbs to go up draw weight instead of buying a new bow.

I'm a compound shooter myself - compounds will let you improve faster and the bows themselves usually have at least 10# of adjustability in them (some a lot more). Hard to avoid the tacticool element with modern ones though (maybe a Mathews might be your speed if you've got the cash). Modern compounds are amazing though - the technology's been moving fast and bows are better than they've ever been.

I ask about what you're doing with it because hunting and target bows are totally different beasts. If you want to move into hunting once you get some practice in rather than get competitive with target archery, I'd say get the hunting bow.

>>28309666
Hey thanks, I just want to shoot some things before I decide to try hunting or not.

So just a real basic bow to start, maybe I will go traditional.

>>28309300
I honestly still can't tell whether that's a joke or not from the video.

>>28309666
>a fast compound bow will make you pull peak draw weight earlier and for longer than a trad bow before it cams over into the valley.
I'm just getting into it myself but the design and quality of the cam seem to be a major factors in that. I tried a large number of compound bows before selecting one and the differences in draw cycle feel within the same pound range was astounding. I don't recall the model name but I believe it was a Bear that utilized a turbo cam and it absolutely slayed me with how hard the last hump was. A heap that weren't notable in any particular way although a couple of the Diamond carbon models were exceptionally light weight, an Elite Synergy that never felt like it actually peaked, a Prime Rize that felt great all around, and a Bowtech Prodigy that felt like it drew 10lbs lighter than it was set, I had to have their tech show me it on the scale because I couldn't believe how easy it was to draw. Would have been nice to try Hoyt's lineup as well but their only major retailer in the area don't give no fucks.

Well if this is an archery thread, then I guess this is the place to ask... Are Japanese bows shittier than Western and steppe peoples' bows because they don't have curves?

How much does restringing a 4 year old Mathews go for these days?

>>28310938
Hate to state the obvious but cost of parts plus cost of labor. A mildly informed guess says 75-200 depending on what you're doing and what the place doing it charges for it I'd guess. Might be able to save a few bucks if you have a private shop near you, they're the ones that tend to wave installs when you buy whatever you need through them even if it's a couple bucks less online you might save in the end.
>>28308918
>>28309129
I recall my parents only ever using feather fletching on their bird arrows when hunting compound for the extra drag, they were never really worried about maintaining them meticulously, more about restricting how far they could fly.

>>28310004
When and if you do get a bow (especially a trad bow), don't cheap out on your arrows and don't just shoot any old arrows either.

You'll want carbon arrows for one, but really most important is having correctly spined (i.e. just the right stiffness) arrows. Get some expert advice on working that out when you know your draw length and weight for certain.

With a compound you can shoot too stiff a spine without to many problems, but with trad you'll want it just right.

>>28312522
Easton actually has an arrow selector, you just feed it bow type, draw weight and length, and it lists the arrow models you can use and the spine range.

>>28308738
Instead of shitposting, try using Google. It's not hard.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-2S0X8jPXR8

>>28312848
Are we talking the easton selection charts or have they put together a calculator? Because I'd fucking love it if they did a calculator that lets you input insert weight and can do spine for point weights over 150 grains.

>>28312941
Bottom of the website.

>>28312987
Nice, never noticed that before. Doesn't quite do what I'm after but cool nonetheless.

I just want a spine calculator to tell me things like the shaft I'd need for a 29.5" arrow with 200 grains point weight shot from a 70# RPM 360. I don't own an RPM 360, but I'd like to know anyway.

>>28313034
Hunting arrow site lets you pick point weight, target doesn't.