# If this is to be a science



## Dayhiker (Mar 13, 2010)

Look. If you want to compare bands or tubes. Each one has to be compared to your own personal draw length and to what ammo is being shot.

Period.

This can be an infinite matrix.

There are various charts already made for this sort of thing. I've used them. They get me in the ballpark. But nothing will compare to you-yourself doing some experimenting and tweaking.

That is all.


----------



## NightKnight (Dec 16, 2009)

You certainly cannot beat trying them yourself. But, I think it is good that people share what they find. It can help others more quickly get in the "ballpark".


----------



## lightgeoduck (Apr 3, 2011)

I have to agree DH. I appreciate, and soak in as much info form the guys that take the time to gather data. I am not an exact science kind of guy, but they do help me get a ballpark idea giving me a good starting point. I do tweak and adjust to my needs, of course, for a few reasons:

1. I am a bit awkward

2. I usually set up, where I don't use the full potential of the rubber, this helps prolong the life of my band sets IMO.

I love this forum for that particular reason, there is enough information to cater to all types of slingshot shooters

LGD


----------



## Dayhiker (Mar 13, 2010)

AaronC said:


> You certainly cannot beat trying them yourself. But, I think it is good that people share what they find. It can help others more quickly get in the "ballpark".


Dude, that was my point. Duh! :king:

Just bustin' em, Aaron. But the other really important factor that gets left out in these charts is your own personal strength -- that's REALLY important.


----------



## lightgeoduck (Apr 3, 2011)

Dayhiker said:


> AaronC said:
> 
> 
> > You certainly cannot beat trying them yourself. But, I think it is good that people share what they find. It can help others more quickly get in the "ballpark".
> ...


Ha, I want to hear you say that statement on video...


----------



## Henry the Hermit (Jun 2, 2010)

I like to measure things. I like to share what I find with others. I hope that others will try the same experiments I do, to either validate what I find, or help me find what I did wrong. There are so many variables in slingshooting that there will always be room for experimentation and improvement. This will never be a one-size-fits-all sport and that's one of the things I love about it.


----------



## Dayhiker (Mar 13, 2010)

Henry in Panama said:


> I like to measure things. I like to share what I find with others. I hope that others will try the same experiments I do, to either validate what I find, or help me find what I did wrong. There are so many variables in slingshooting that there will always be room for experimentation and improvement. This will never be a one-size-fits-all sport and that's one of the things I love about it.


That is right on, Henry. What good are your experiments to me if I'm only half as strong as you are? Or twice as strong? Band length be dammed.


----------



## LBurnett (Feb 21, 2012)

AMEN


----------



## torsten (Feb 9, 2010)

100% agree.


----------



## NightKnight (Dec 16, 2009)

But, band X with a band length of X pulled to X using ammo X is pretty definitive. Strength only matters if it does not allow you to reproduce the "pulled to X" variable.


----------



## Henry the Hermit (Jun 2, 2010)

Dayhiker said:


> Henry in Panama said:
> 
> 
> > I like to measure things. I like to share what I find with others. I hope that others will try the same experiments I do, to either validate what I find, or help me find what I did wrong. There are so many variables in slingshooting that there will always be room for experimentation and improvement. This will never be a one-size-fits-all sport and that's one of the things I love about it.
> ...


I can't answer that, Bill. My experiments are not intended as a formula for folks to go to and pick a tube set that will work best for them. More than anything else, I started testing these small tubes to inform others of how efficient and inexpensive they can be. A lot of people have tried small tubes since, and I like to think that my experiments had a little bit to do with encouraging them to do so. Everything else is just a reflection on how I get my kicks.


----------



## lightgeoduck (Apr 3, 2011)

AaronC said:


> But, band X with a band length of X pulled to X using ammo X is pretty definitive. Strength only matters if it does not allow you to reproduce the "pulled to X" variable.


HA, with your formula you will be screwed. I can't see anyone succeeding no matter what they determined "X" to equal..


----------



## Dayhiker (Mar 13, 2010)

Henry in Panama said:


> Dayhiker said:
> 
> 
> > Henry in Panama said:
> ...


Yet and still, Henry, your experiments can be a really good starting point for someone who wants to know where to begin. I'm not discounting your valuable input -- just trying to make sure a newbie doesn't make the mistake of taking anything therein as gospel. It still remains an art, after all, doesn't it?

@Aaron: I know what you mean. But after you've done the neat and incontestable calculations, you still need to tweak things -- unless you're satisfied. As for me, I've been satisfied many times. And then satisfied even more later on. Know what I mean?


----------



## pop shot (Sep 29, 2011)

but what tubes would get me 374 fps at 70 deg shooting 1/4" steel at 38" draw 550% stretch?


----------



## capnjoe (Jun 3, 2012)

Can't high speeds be achieved with lighter bands and ammo?


----------



## Henry the Hermit (Jun 2, 2010)

pop shot said:


> but what tubes would get me 374 fps at 70 deg shooting 1/4" steel at 38" draw 550% stretch?


That depends entirely on how strong you smell, but pseudo-tapered 2040 would be a good starting point.


----------



## Dayhiker (Mar 13, 2010)

pop shot said:


> but what tubes would get me 374 fps at 70 deg shooting 1/4" steel at 38" draw 550% stretch?


That's easy. Tex-shooter's heavy tubes. [email protected]!


----------



## Rayshot (Feb 1, 2010)

To recap what is the bottom line.

-It is great guys do experiments and give the particulars.

-above experiments closely imitated will get us in the ballpark of experiment results or reveal we have some variable off, if our result is way off. Providing of course said experiment is not fluky.

- I think all our comments are in the ballpark. We need a few more for a game.


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

pop shot said:


> but what tubes would get me 374 fps at 70 deg shooting 1/4" steel at 38" draw 550% stretch?


.

.

... :nerd: ... psuedo tapered urethra tubes . :mellow: . . .


----------



## The Gopher (Aug 25, 2010)

What if i shoot my slingshot while flying in a plane? That should increase my speed right


----------



## lightgeoduck (Apr 3, 2011)

The Gopher said:


> What if i shoot my slingshot while flying in a plane? That should increase my speed right


Only if you shoot towards the tail


----------



## Imperial (Feb 9, 2011)

The Gopher said:


> What if i shoot my slingshot while flying in a plane? That should increase my speed right


.

.

would you pee into the wind or with the wind ? :nerd: ( woo hoo im channeling confucious )


----------



## bigron (Nov 29, 2012)

i agree with henry :iagree:


----------



## Smashtoad (Sep 3, 2010)

AaronC said:


> But, band X with a band length of X pulled to X using ammo X is pretty definitive. Strength only matters if it does not allow you to reproduce the "pulled to X" variable.


Well said...and again (for the third time I think), if we compiled all these variables into a spreadsheet, over time, our matrix would be easily able to quickly answer any question resembling the following:

*"I have a 34" draw with my current sling and want to shoot 7/16" steel with a single set of 1745 tubes. As I am hunting, tube life is second in importance to force for this particular catapult. Factoring in 1.5" for attachment to fork and pouch, how long should my tubes be cut for maximum velocity?"*

I have this type of question all the time (with every new catty I make), with varying inputs, and have so far been flying by the seat of my pants. Many times I have crashed, and I end up drawing way too tight or way too loose. Good tubing and my time is valuable to me, and I don't enjoy wasting the tubing or time it takes to tube up a sling. Recently I have started cutting a one inch section and pulling it to what feels like the right tension and multiplying up. The jury is still out on whether or not this works well...but I am leaning towards no. Not sure why.

For example, the difference between a 5" and a 6" length of 1842 is substancial, ranging from 28" to 34.5" draws at 575% stretch. When you are trying to land right on your anchor point, and your draw with each sling you shoot is different, these variances are a big deal in terms of velocity.

It seems that many of you guys with cronys are aquiring this information anyway...why not compile it into a comprehensive matrix that removes a ton of the guess work? I for one am growing weary of drawing for the first time and knowing immediately I either won't reach my anchor point without being nervous of a snap, or that my 7/16" steel isn't even going to penetrate a steel can from 30 feet.

As far as this not being science goes...not sure what that means, because it is science (Physics). Sorry to be a Wiesenheimer...but saying it isn't scientific is just silly.

Now, temperature and Quality Control are obviously out of our control, temp can be factored in, but QC cannot. Hopefully the latter would remain consistent. If QC is not consistent, a matrix would eventually reveal that, and the use of that tube could be curtailed by those who don't want to guess which lot# they'll get. Distance from sling to the crony would have to consistent as well, as drop-off will be a factor.

Another thing to consider is that with improving technologies, not to mention all the new-age silicone formulations being made these days, new tubes and bands are bound to come along. Having the matrix established would allow us to quickly substanciate or discount them for our purposes as they come along, saving a ton of trial and error.

I plan to start hunting with a sling soon, and hope to do it for the rest of my life. This data may seem trivial to some, but it would be cool to have, and the means to complie it isn't that complicated. It would just take some time. I don't have a crony, but would be glad to keep the spreadsheet. How to share it would have to be worked out, though. I have tried a few times to upload an example to the forum a couple times and it hasn't worked well for me.

Anyway, it's Friday, and I had some time at work to think about this. Sorry for the novella.


----------



## Viper010 (Apr 21, 2012)

lightgeoduck said:


> AaronC said:
> 
> 
> > But, band X with a band length of X pulled to X using ammo X is pretty definitive. Strength only matters if it does not allow you to reproduce the "pulled to X" variable.
> ...


X = 5.3
formula works perfect! hah! 

sorry duck, couldnt resist!


----------

